Hello all, I also support the proposal. Although it won't stop speculation, it will at least discourage it. I'd also support an even longer waiting period.
I don't believe anyone who seriously starts a business will have a problem with such "limitation". Of course we'll have to consider the issue that Elvis mentioned earlier, about M&A Regards George On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Erik Bais <[email protected]> wrote: > Having read the emails in this discussion I think that we are moving away > from the policy at hand ... > > This policy is not about reverting the final /8 policy ... > > The discussion is amusing to read and I like ( mind I say .. Love ? ! ) to > read what the different opinions are in the community about moving faster > or > reverting at all.. > The policy is about closing a gap in the current procedure .. which we all > see is being abused against the original intent of the stated policy ... > > The reasoning for reservation of the /22's in the final /8 is for new LIR's > and current LIR's, to be able to get into the market and do v4 to v6 CGNAT > or something alike .. or at least get some kind of startup going on some IP > space ... That was the original intent .. > > Currently what I see ( And with that, I'm sure that Elvis agrees with me.. > ) > as a broker you see people offering that /22 to the market in order to make > a quick buck. > I don't mind .. An IPv4 resource is an IPv4 resource .. a transaction is a > transaction .... however this is against the original intent of the policy > ... > > We have a 24 month waiting period for IPv4 space after being transferred, > to > avoid 'stock piling' or to speculation .. What was not foreseen at that > time, is that new allocations should also fall under that same 24 month > waiting period ... > > This policy is to close the flipping of the /22´s to the market .. Even > setting up new LIR's and flipping the /22's and closing the LIR's again ... > By having the /22's fall under the same 24 month waiting period, it will > make it more expensive for $parties to flip those resources ... Yes you > will > still make money, but they have to hold the investment for 24 months at > least .. > The profit they can/will make is gone for 2 years .. Now that might not > stop > all speculation, but it will stop the majority of the people with the idea > of how to get rich quick, or at least make a quick buck .. > > I think that we should get this policy change in place and not because it > will drive more people to the actual broker market ... Because the real IP > brokers with actual inventory, can really do without these small prefixes > in > the sales sheets for inventory .. > > The idea to close this, is because that flipping of the /22's of the final > /8 goes against the intent of the initial policy. > > Having said that, it is a Support +1 from me on this. > > Regards, > Erik Bais > > > >
