[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-165 Eliminate Needs-Based Justification

[Owen DeLong]

Jeff,

If this policy is adopted, it would enable speculative brokers who wanted to to maintain inventory without showing need for the addresses. It would potentially turn IP addresses into a commodities futures market which I do not believe would serve the community well.

You say that no purpose is served when a transfer is rejected between a company with an unused allocation and a company in need.  Current policy does not do that. It does limit the size of the transfer to the justified need, but, it does not reject the transfer.

However, no purpose is served when addresses are allowed to be purchased by organizations without need and great harm could come from allowing such transactions if they start occurring on large scale in order to engage in speculation or worse, anti-competitive practices.

Owen

On Feb 17, 2012, at 7:19 AM, <jeffmehlenbacher at ipv4marketgroup.com> <jeffmehlenbacher at ipv4marketgroup.com> wrote:

> Paul, I cannot speak to how other brokers structure their business, but we do not actually hold address space if I interpret you literally.  Our Sellers hold the address space.  We are contracted by companies with unused IPv4 blocks to source a company with need.  Once a potential needer is identified, we facilitate agreement on price, timing and other conditions of a transfer then provide the necessary legal documents and guidance to execute the transactions contingent upon ARIN approval.  The value of any broker--be it insurance, mortgage, real estate or IPv4 transfers--is subjective but clearly if a Seller and a Buyer prefer to use a broker, they should do so.  The Policy Proposal as written assumes there may or may not be broker involvement in Specified Transfers.  
> 
> Jeff Mehlenbacher
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-165 Eliminate Needs-Based
> Justification
> From: Paul Vixie <paul at redbarn.org>
> Date: Fri, February 17, 2012 9:18 am
> To: jeffmehlenbacher at ipv4marketgroup.com
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> 
> On 2012-02-17 7:17 AM, jeffmehlenbacher at ipv4marketgroup.com wrote:
> > I would agree that free allocations should be scrutinized closely to
> > ensure need. For 8.3 Specified Transfers however, no purpose is served
> > when a transfer is rejected between a Company with an unused allocation
> > and a Company in need. The unused IPv4 block at the source Company
> > remains unused. The rejected recipient Company must seek alternatives
> > which may include applying to ARIN for a smaller block from the free
> > pool. 
> >
> > Jeff Mehlenbacher
> 
> jeff, i'm concerned with the case where a broker actually holds address
> space. the current transfer system allows recipients with greater need
> to receive resources from those with lesser need. i do not understand
> the value add of putting resources into a broker's inventory. --paul
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120217/09bcb04d/attachment.htm>