[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs

[Milton L Mueller]

> so i thought i'd chime in: i consider that case to be extremely unmade as yet. even though i am in most other ways a free-marketeer. as stewards of a public resource ARIN has always been guided by RFC 2050 which requires recipients of these public resources to justify their need, no matter whether these resources are coming from a central pool or a private transfer.


[Milton L Mueller] This is a religious argument Paul. A statement of your belief, nothing more. Can we try to move beyond that? We've all got beliefs.

I would like to know your definition of "public resource," and precisely how such resources are different from other resources. Addresses are clearly not "public goods" which is a term with a precise definition in economics, so don't waste time arguing about that. The characteristics of public goods are well known and IP numbers don't fit them (IP numbers are both rival in consumption and excludable, so they are not public goods.)

But there is more. If you somehow succeed in providing a definition, I then would like to see a scientific and/or logical derivation of how "being a public resource" requires administrative needs assessment rather than market-based allocation. What exactly is being optimized via needs assessment? Conservation? Unlikely, higher prices do a better job of conserving than any other social mechanism. In an environment in which the free pool is completely or almost gone, and in which prices can do the work of rationing, please tell me why needs assessments do anything we need to have done.

After you do those two things, you might explain why there is strong, perhaps overwhelming support for eliminating needs assessment in the RIPE region. Have they all gone mad there? Are they possessed by the Devil?

Looking forward to substantive exchanges on this topic

--MM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130410/70d67910/attachment.htm>