[arin-ppml] A Redefinition of IPv4 Need post ARIN run-out (was: Re:Against 2013-4)

[Brandon Ross]

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
>> What about a needs-free transfer cap?
>
> It'd have to be per-timeframe (per year). A per-transfer cap would be
> meaningless.

I support the idea, in general, of needs-free transfer cap, however, I'd 
suggest that cap be based on the total amount of address space that an 
entity controls rather than a per period or per transfer based cap.

In other words, if you are big enough to justify, in total, a /12 of 
address space, then you are big enough to handle the burden of 
justification.  If you have less space than that, in aggregate, then the 
needs requirement can be waived.

If shell corporations are a concern, then the cap can be made small enough 
such that any attempt to corner the market would be easy to detect because 
of the sheer number of shells necessary to do so.  Perhaps it's possible 
to hide the ownership of a dozen, but certainly not 100 or 1000.

It is worthwhile, however, to point out that if I wanted to hoard IPv4 
address space, there's nothing stopping me from doing that using shell 
corporations now, so I don't see how removing the cap for small 
allocations really makes much of a difference.

-- 
Brandon Ross                                      Yahoo & AIM:  BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667                                                ICQ:  2269442
Schedule a meeting:  https://doodle.com/bross            Skype:  brandonross