<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Member Services <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><div><br><br>[ snip ]<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
4.X.1 Implementation Timing<br>
<br>
ARIN shall begin offering financial incentives for the return<br>
of IPv4 number resources as specified in section 4.X when<br>
IANA announces that the last full /8's in the IANA free pool<br>
have been allocated to RIR(s).</blockquote><div><br><br>This may be ineffective. Considering that transfers with cash benefit are occurring now, it may be worthwhile to consider making policies like this one "emergency".<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
4.X.2 Recovery of IPv4 Resources<br>
<br>
Organizations should voluntarily return unused and/or unneeded<br>
number resources to ARIN based on ARIN's current utilization<br>
guidelines. ARIN will provide instructions on how to<br>
voluntarily return number resources on the ARIN web site.<br>
<br>
After the conditions in section 4.x.1 are met, ARIN will<br>
offer financial incentives for the return of IPv4 number<br>
resources to ARIN and relinquishment of any future claims<br>
to those resources. ARIN will use the bids from section<br>
4.X.3 to determine the value of returned resources.</blockquote><div><br><br>Are we not simply acknowledging the gray market with this policy and attempting to compete? I think that if ARIN offered a price lower than the current $250K per /16 for example (~$4 per /32), they would not only be able to recover any v4 space, they would push prices /higher/ since they would be acknowledging that IP addresses do in fact have a cash value contrary to what we have been saying. The RSA and LRSA are not lost on me. The lack for some of LRSA and RSA are not lost on me either. The loose policy structure around transfer is also not lost on me or others hence the conflict we see in the organization around transfer now.<br>
<br>Competing with an existing market or spending on buying back v4 address space now likely push our fees higher. I'm not in favor of higher fees with recovery as a basis.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
4.X.3 Allocation of Recovered IPv4 Resources<br>
<br>
After a requester has been approved for IPv4 number resources<br>
via any policy in section 4 or section 11 of the NRPM, ARIN<br>
will ask the requester to specify a binding bid of how much<br>
they are willing to pay for reclamation of number resources<br>
to satisfy their request. The requester may make a higher<br>
bid at any time, which is treated as a brand new bid replacing<br>
their old bid.<br>
<br>
Requesters may choose to bid $0, in which case they would<br>
only be eligible for number resources that were voluntarily<br>
returned to ARIN.<br>
<br>
IPv4 number resources recovered by ARIN under section 4.X.2<br>
will be offered to those who have been waiting the longest<br>
with bids high enough to cover ARIN's cost to recover the<br>
resource. If ARIN offers IPv4 number resources at or below<br>
the requesters bid the requester will be required to take<br>
the space at the offered price.</blockquote><div><br>I don't think that this policy has been thought out well-or-long-enough. It has potential and the intent is understood and appreciated. <br><br>Why not instead submit to the suggestions process and ask that [further] money be allocated to research and development of an actual market mechanism and associated transfer policy as a "regular activity of ARIN staff"? </div>
<div><br><br>[ clip ]<br><br></div><div><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
Compared to other "transfer proposals", this proposal has the following<br>
benefits:</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
- Maintains that IP addresses are not property.<br>
- Maintains the concept that unused addresses should be returned to<br>
the free pool.<br>
- Maintains need based addressing.<br>
- Removes the need for those with excess resources to find those<br>
without resources. There is no need for any sort of listing<br>
service, eBay, etc.<br>
- All transactions are two party transactions with ARIN as one of<br>
the parties. The potential for multi-party legal disputes is<br>
reduced.<br>
- ARIN can absorb spikes in supply or demand, creating more level<br>
prices over time.<br>
- ARIN can provide transparency across all transactions in this<br>
system.<br>
- Reduces confusion to new entrants over where they should go to<br>
receive address space.<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>No offense intended folks, but these benefits seem more like tchochkes than benefits, IMHO.<br><br>Best,<br><br>Martin<br><br><br>
<br><br>