[arin-ppml] Waiting List IPv4 blocks transferred after issuance

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed May 29 16:18:13 EDT 2019


Apologies… It was not intended as such.

All of us have a natural tendency to color our opinions with our perspectives, our interests, and our experiences.

I have nothing against you or against brokers in general. I admit that I wish we didn’t need IP address monetization as I believe it creates multiple incentives in directions that aren’t necessarily good.

Nonetheless, I do recognize the need and I have voted in favor of various policies related to that in my tenure on the AC.

Hopefully we can move beyond IPv4 in for the most part in the coming years..


> On May 29, 2019, at 5:24 AM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Owen,
> 
> The plain inference that my opinion is based on my brokering is ad hominem.
> However, I will allow it! ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> ---- On Tue, 28 May 2019 22:52:13 -0400 Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote ----
> 
> Mike,
> 
> Yes and no. I believe that the lack of legacy holders for any blocks issued under 4.1.8 reduces the need for the market.
> 
> Defunct organizations can easily be reclaimed in this space because they stop paying their ARIN bill.
> 
> Eliminating the resale value of these addresses won’t really encourage squatting on them and limiting the size of organization and size of block that can benefit from 4.1.8 further helps to reduce the potential for hoarding.
> 
> I realize that as a broker, any address that can’t be monetized is a lost opportunity for your organization, but I think there’s plenty of addresses out there that haven’t been processed through 4.1.8, so I don’t think limiting the resale potential of such blocks to reduce fraud is a bad idea.
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
> On May 28, 2019, at 12:46 , Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com>> wrote:
> 
> The percentages of blocks transferred takes a significant leap at the /19 size.
> Below that, the percentages are all below 7%.
> At /19 and above, the percentages are all above 21%.
> Seems like a natural demarcation for maximum block size, but prices do continue to rise.
> While we want to fight fraud, we should still remember the underlying reasons for the Ipv4 transfer market apply to these addresses as well.
> That is, the market provides incentives for efficient use and accurate registration.
>  
> Regards,
> Mike
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> On Behalf Of John Curran
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 1:53 PM
> To: ARIN-PPML List <arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Waiting List IPv4 blocks transferred after issuance
> Importance: High
>  
> Folks - 
>  
> It occurred to me that it might be useful to have a quick summary of waiting list blocks issued and subsequently transferred. 
>  
> Attached is the distribution (count per prefix size) of all blocks that have been issued via ARIN's waiting list policy and subsequently transferred via NRPM 8.2/8.3/8.4 policy.
>  
> FYI,
> /John
>  
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>  
>  
>  
> <image001.png>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto: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/20190529/bc90c4b0/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list