[arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....

Paul Vixie paul at redbarn.org
Sat Sep 3 05:56:01 EDT 2011

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 12:22:10 -0400
Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net> wrote:

> ...
> There are a handful of dominant voices on PPML that are against
> ownership of IPv4 at all costs. They blame the speculators. On the
> other hand, what if it costs me $500,000 to adopt IPv6 but I can
> satisfy my 10 year requirement by purchasing $200,000 in IPv4. ARIN
> should allow this.
> (Note: I support IPv6 and am running IPv6 on my network currently, so
> my intent is not to avoid IPv6 adoption).
> ...

Noted.  However, as to your question, ARIN does not prohibit the
operating model you described above.  Transferrable right to use is an
effective way to achieve the described result; property rights per se
are not relevant to anything except non-needs-based holders.  That's
the only place where speculation rears its (ugly) head.

> ...
> ARIN needs to treat IPv4 and IPv6 as equals, and allow IPv4 space to
> trade freely. Once it becomes too expensive to buy IPv4, many will
> begin to see IPv6 as the more attractive option.

can you explain how "free trade" will increase utilization of IPv4
compared to the needs-based transfer mechanism described in NRPM 8?
Paul Vixie

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list