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

[Matthew Kaufman]

On 5/11/2011 8:17 PM, Blake Dunlap wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 22:09, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com 
> <mailto:mike at nationwideinc.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Jon,
>     Here are some examples of an entity that may want to purchase
>     addresses but not demonstrate need:
>     1. A company with a 5 year planning horizon
>
>
> Don't use IPv4, done.

Not a very good risk mitigation strategy. A company may wish to hedge 
their bets about the speed of the IPv6 transition.

>     2. A company that wants to provide temporary allocations
>
>
> Why do they need extra space?

This seems obvious.

>     3. A company that wants to specialize in very rapid allocations,
>     like same-day service.
>
>
> Not an issue until the block get unreasonably big for such a service.

Huh? How could they possibly justify any acquisition of space, no matter 
how small, for this purpose?

>     4. A company that stocks addresses for sale in to those who would
>     pay more for guaranteed availability
>
>     5. A company who is concerned about future supply.
>
> Both of the above are something that shouldn't deserve IPs

Really? A company concerned about future supply doesn't deserve IP 
addresses? The entire point of needs justification is to justify the 
need not just for *today* but for 12 months in the future (or 3 months 
in the future for some unfortunate entities).

>     6. A company that wishes to lease address space rather than sell it
>
> What?

This seems obvious to me as well. Leasing is one of the several ways 
holders of IP address space might make it available to others.

>
>     7. A company who seeks to buy up small allocations to aggregate
>     them in to larger, more valuable netblocks
>
> Good (expletive) luck. The birthday paradox on this is pretty stupidly 
> big.

This I do agree with.

>     8. A seller of vanity ip addresses like 100.100.100.100
>
> Ok, this one i'll buy, but it's still stupid, that's what DNS is for. 
> You don't see the same argument for MAC addresses for the same reason.

Can't be that stupid... see 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4

>     9. A speculator willing to risk money to buy addresses as an
>     investment for anticipated gains in address prices.
>
> See #5

This is one of the ways that market liquidity is generated. If we don't 
have this then it'll be *harder* to get IP address space when you need 
it, whether or not you can do a needs justification.

This is another reason why the 3-month limits for new/recent entrants 
are such a big problem post-runout... they eliminate speculative 
activity BUT the lack of speculative activity means that coming back for 
more in 3 months is actually harder rather than easier.

>     10. A company whose anticipated need does not begin for 12 months.
>
> Wait 9 months, it's not all about you.

Try raising venture capital for a project that will need IPv4 and IPv6 
access once product development is complete and disclose that you're not 
going to try to get space until several months post-runout and see what 
the potential investors say.

Matthew Kaufman

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110511/874f41e8/attachment.htm>