[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-151 Limiting Needs Requirements for IPv4 Transfers

[Jimmy Hess]

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
[snip]
> The /12 is open for negotiation, but I think it seems too small to hope to
> corner a market to the point you could affect price.
> But I suppose that depends on how large and vibrant a market we expect.

/12 doesn't prevent hoarding; it just leads to inefficient hoarding.
16 shell organizations can hold a /8  for the real speculator....  one
/12 at a time.

If ARIN were to want to remove needs justification, and thereby throw the door
open to speculators,
Then, at that point, once ARIN's done that, they should encourage as
much competition
on the sell side as possible.

One or two speculators with a /12,  could lead to an IP address
liquidity problem,
if IPs are not coming up from other sources, which might result in a
bidding war,
and therefore, a high price per IP in response to a small number of
transactions.

If ARIN wants to waive needs justification but set limits, it should
be _how long_
anyone can hold on to any specific IP addresses they don't need,  more
so than how
many IP  addresses they can hold on to.

ARIN could also mitigate this by setting a price "per IP" that ARIN is
willing to pay
for addresses returned to ARIN.

E.g.  "Return 50% or more of a  /16 or longer allocation, and get
$0.001 per IP address."
"Return 50% or more of a  /8 or longer allocation  and get  $0.0005
per IP address"

That could then help protect the liquidity of IP addresses,  by
encouraging more returns
to the free pools.

At some point, ARIN would probably need to stop handling the clearing
of new IP addresses,
using maintenance fees, and instead rely on third party  "market
makers"  to hold IP addresses.

ARIN could more efficiently cover their expenses by getting the
_market value_ of IP addresses
for new allocations.

It doesn't make sense that you have a market in one corner and allow
it to benefit
certain third parties financially,  and in the other corner have the
community itself,
still getting any free pool allocations under the old rules, and not
benefitting from
the "efficiency" introduced by having a market

--
-JH