[arin-ppml] "Eligibility for Receiving IP Address Transfers — Evaluating Alternative Policy Options"

[John Curran]

On Sep 24, 2014, at 12:42 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:

> Interesting document.
> 
> I do disagree with the conclusion for "encouraging transition" in some cases. For instance, should a wealthy network buy up all IPv4 in order to avoid transition, doesn't that scarcity force every other network to transition to IPv6 more quickly?

Impossible to know - it is equally possible to cause parties to avoid 
IPv6 on the assumption that such large networks are not migrating...

> I also note that it only weakly touches on the idea of future sales contracts, though we have some anecdotal evidence that this is exactly what "wealthy network operators" are doing right now.

Future sales contracts are not a mechanism that would occur in policy, 
so they are not directly addressed by the paper.  

> Both "conservation" and "excluding speculators" are modified significantly in their meaning if we have big players locking up exclusive access to /8s via these kinds of contracts. For instance, under "Maintain needs assessment as is" the conclusion is (incorrectly) "Conservation: ... This keeps addresses available for others. Wealth alone is not sufficient to claim addresses."

You omitted the paragraph which follows - 

".. As in all approaches evaluated in this document, speculators can enter into forward contracts in order to capture the economic substance of a transaction without formal recognition by ARIN."

i.e. the conclusion is accurate but the result (as acknowledged 
in the paper) limited to the extent that ARIN policy is followed.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN