[arin-ppml] Revised and Retitled - Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Permit IPv4 Leased Addresses for Purposes of Determining Utilization for Future Allocations
mike at iptrading.com
Fri Mar 11 13:25:23 EST 2022
I am not understanding.
Can you be more clear on whose costs are increased by this policy exactly?
Are you saying that because investors could buy more addresses (through demonstrating to ARIN utilization on operating networks) that would raise IPv4 purchase prices? Because they would add demand to the transfer market?
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but that is something worthy of discussion I guess.
From: Brian Jones <bjones at vt.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 11:58 AM
To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>; ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Retitled - Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Permit IPv4 Leased Addresses for Purposes of Determining Utilization for Future Allocations
IMHO Allowing for rent-seeking behavior increases the cost to those who are actually building and operating networks, therefore further limiting the availability of Internet number resources available for those with less funds to purchase them.
On Mar 11, 2022, at 10:09 AM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com> > wrote:
This policy removes the circuit requirement but retains the requirement that blocks be used on operating networks.
This policy only affects transferred (read “purchased”) addresses and I don’t see how it affects fair and impartial distribution, can you elucidate the manner in which fair and impartial distributions are affected by removing the circuit requirement?
I don’t think the proposal would have been approved for discussion if it opposed fair and impartial distribution.
The original proposal had wording to include the stipulation that Internet numbers were to be used by those building and operating networks.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML