<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On May 12, 2011, at 12:02 PM, Jonathan Fernatt wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">>> The addresses will likely flow to a very small number of very well capitalized entities in any event... the only question is what type of entity they are. In Mike's world they flow to folks who do things like lease address space and sell blocks at high prices to people who really need them... in your world they flow to the top N ISPs that are experts at showing need, aren't constrained by the 3-month rules, and are growing sufficiently to justify anything.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> I think the results are actually the top N ISPs in both cases eventually. The difference is that Mike's resultant value<br>
> of N tends to be much smaller than mine.<br>
<br>
</div>I'd argue the reverse, actually. If there is a needs basis then the top N ISPs have an advantage in that they are already experts at manipulating the needs basis. (And it really is manipulation, because any of them could actually get by with much much less than they already have if the "need" took into account things like forcing customers to use NAT)<br>
<br>
One could argue, for instance, that *with* a needs basis Comcast might end up holding nearly all the space... but without a needs basis it might be an investment banking firm instead, who'd then lease the space out to move providers than just Comcast.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
><br>
>> In Mike's world, you can get service from whoever you want but the price of space is high... in your world the price of (what is now provider-assigned) space is high and your choice of transit providers is limited.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> I really don't see how you come to these conclusions. My argument is that under Mike's proposed policy,<br>
> your choice of providers would become more limited.<br>
<br>
</div>I think you've got it backwards... see above.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I don't think ARIN compares the specified recipients need to that of Comcast's for example, though. So how would this example apply at all? Am I misunderstanding the NRPM as written? </div>
<div><br></div><div>Jon</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><div>ARIN processes request on a first-come first-serve basis. If the need is justified, they issue the addresses.</div><div>If the need is not justified, they do not.</div><div><br></div><div>There is no comparison of need between organizations.</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br></div></body></html>