[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4

[George Herbert]

On Jun 5, 2013, at 9:10 AM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:

> They'll have a lot more fun analyzing the real data from the aftermath rather than trying to predict something that shouldn't matter.

The term "the aftermath" is apt; it often is used looking back at disasters, wondering why some more precautions and due diligence weren't used...

If it really didn't matter, it seems highly likely there would not be this level of disagreement over what the problem is ( if any ) and what solutions are optimal or even acceptable.

I do not currently have a dog in this fight, but have been watching constrained market economics disasters enough to be fearful of the outcome if we let slip the dogs of completely unregulated compensated transfer.  We could have anything from a speculator throwing a few billion dollars in the ring and monopolizing the market to all our detriments, price-wise, to the IPv6 transition happening faster than expected and the bottom falling out of prices.

Operationally I fear the latter is unlikely, but with sufficient motivation...


Ultimately, the real policy risk is that rather than freeing up assets efficiently, the economics actually traps or endangers them.  Think untangling residential mortgage markets, credit-default swaps, etc., much less any sort of mere market bubble / collapse.

If we do not understand the economic situation we have no means to predict what damaging failures are more likely and how to deal with them.

This is true wherever on the ultimate address fungibility scale one prefers the solution to be, for personal, professional, or policy reasons.  Holders of address space, and customers thereof, are as likely to get screwed as helped.  If you just want to take the leap and let it settle out as it will, fine, but that doesn't mean it's wise as a policy or even in your own economic best interests.



George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone