<div dir="ltr"><div style>In this discussion about "large ISPs", it is important to separate </div><div style>organizations into two categories:</div><div><br></div><div style>1. Those that hold only legacy address space</div>
<div style>2. Those that may (or may not) hold legacy address space, and </div><div style> also a direct allocation / assignment from ARIN.</div><div style><br></div><div style>1. In the case of the former it is possible that they acquired </div>
<div style>classfull addressing, and gotten 120 or so extra /16s, based </div><div style>on the then understanding of efficient use, and routability. </div><div style>Assuming slow growth and a supply of addresses that will not </div>
<div style>be used before most of the Internet supports IPv6, then yes </div><div style>these organizations have a competitive advantage. </div><div style>(These organizations also happen to be the ones with the </div><div style>
greatest potential to benefit monetarily from entering into an </div><div style>agreement to transfer IPs.)</div><div style><br></div><div style>In the case of the former with faster growth, where their </div><div style>
remaining legacy addresses represent two years or less of</div>
<div style>available growth, then there is no advantage.</div><div style><br></div><div style>2. In the case of the latter, they have already exceeded their</div><div style>legacy address holdings, and have had to return to ARIN </div>
<div style>for additional address space. Since that time they have had</div><div style>to demonstrate efficient use of all of their address space </div><div style>(including legacy space) prior to getting additional space.</div>
<div style>These organizations can only have a single quarter supply </div><div style>of addresses.</div><div style><br></div><div style>The only caveat is if the organization's growth has declined.</div><div style>In that case what was one quarter may now be a year. Or</div>
<div style>if they are loosing (and continue to loose) customers, no </div><div style>new addresses should be needed. </div><div style><br></div><div style>Organizations who are not growing or actively loosing their</div>
<div style>customer base does not create a business threat to a </div><div style>competing provider that is facing a future in ability to grow.</div><div style><br></div><div style>The two year's need test for transfers opens these ranges </div>
<div style>above to eight times larges, but is essentially the same </div><div style>argument. </div><div style> <br></div><div style>___Jason</div><div style> </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Owen DeLong <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" target="_blank">owen@delong.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
On Jun 19, 2013, at 3:25 PM, William Herrin <<a href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:14 PM, Mike Burns <<a href="mailto:mike@nationwideinc.com">mike@nationwideinc.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>> 1. It has been argued that the larger ISPs have the prior advantage of<br>
>>> holding highly valuable alienable assets which they received for free, which<br>
>>> provide them with a competitive advantage over less endowed entities seeking<br>
>>> to purchase addresses at a much higher relative price.<br>
>><br>
>> Yes, it has been argued. It hasn't necessarily been substantiated, nor has<br>
>> anyone raising said argument provided any real evidence to support it.<br>
><br>
> Of course the incumbent's assets offer a competitive advantage over<br>
> the challenger. With such a prima facie case, the burden rests on who<br>
> disagree to disprove it.<br>
<br>
</div>That's a different argument.<br>
<br>
The original argument was that larger ISP's resources somehow had a competitive advantage over the resources held by smaller ISPs.<br>
<br>
I don't believe that this has been proven or constitutes a prima facie case.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Owen<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PPML<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
<a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace"><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial"><font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace">_______________________________________________________<br>
</font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">Jason Schiller|NetOps|<a href="mailto:jschiller@google.com" target="_blank">jschiller@google.com</a>|571-266-0006</font></div><div><font face="'courier new', monospace"><br>
</font></div></span></div></font>
</div>