[arin-ppml] Fwd: IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate

[Blake Dunlap]

Mistakenly replied to Owen instead of list, at least according to Gmail, I
apologize if this is a double post.

-Blake

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Blake Dunlap <ikiris at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, May 11, 2011 at 21:17
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>



On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 19:01, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> Care to provide some guidance as to what you would consider acceptable?
> Personally, I believe
> that 2009-1 as it is is a little too open, but, I am interested in opinions
> from the community.
>

The following assumes that holders of legacy space are willing to ceed a
minor couple of footnotes in return for proposed changes.



Lets go at this just thinking of ARIN space for now, and assume all
applicable legacy space would fall to ARIN.


   - Have ARIN instead of the current listing service, operate effectively a
   public price viewable bazaar for all listed blocks, and their child blocks,
   down to /24.
   - All legacy etc holders may now sign a LRSA (which should be modified as
   well if this is enacted to allow the following) and provided the following
   terms are followed, be free of any threat of audit for needs based
   justification on their existing space, as long as they immediently shift to
   the bazaar system outlined below.
   - Any entity wishing to list space for sale on the bazaar, may do so, but
   understand they are restricting themselves from ever receiving free pool
   space again, not based on time period, but ever. Effectively you can pick
   and choose, stay in the free pool system, or switch over to the publicly
   traded internet where you can buy and sell space as you please subject to
   the following
   - Any actual space initially not listed for sale or purchased, must pass
   current needs based justification audit, although I would suggest slightly
   modifying it as such, to allow down to minimum /24s for all parties, so long
   as all attempts are made at aggregation (or at least, something like this).

This does a couple of things, that so far the proposals I have seen do not.
Primarily of which, they remove the issue that many legacy owners have
(myself included), such as the property rights, disputed as they are, or at
least the main benefit gained from them, which is the value of the block.

The main issue I have with the above plan, is I am not sure of a good system
for the actual costs, both of the IP blocks themselves, whether to allow
sellers to have full control or any, or what transfer fees ARIN should
extract in the process.

As for router prefix space, yes its going to happen anyway, might as well
get used to it. IPv4 is going to explode very quickly. Personally I'm
willing to bet the first real kick in the teeth impetus to go to 6 is not
the lack of addresses, its the lack of routability as providers accept less
and less 4 prefixes. I'll even put $20 up to this assertion most likely if
people ask individually for a wager.

Thoughts?

-Blake
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110511/0ec609f9/attachment.htm>