On 6/5/2014 2:32 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Personally, I don't believe that IPv4 runout changes the need for policy that attempts to preserve fairness in how addresses are (re)distributed. I realize and respect that you disagree with this. However, my analysis of the continued need for this policy is not based on the context of ARIN still having IPv4. Obviously I can't authoritatively comment on anyone else's perspective and neither can you.
IPv4 runout certainly changes the need for policy that attempts to preserve fairness in how addresses are distributed *from the ARIN free pool*. Or at least makes any such policy irrelevant unless/until more free pool is generated for IPv4.
The means by which ARIN ensures "fairness" when allocating from the free pool are necessarily quite different than any means by which ARIN might ensure "fairness" when private parties are making agreements to exchange the right to current or future use of address space for money.
Even if there are such means, expecting the *same* policy and mechanisms to have an identical effect in both cases is foolhardy, in my opinion.
If you *really* wanted ARIN to be able to use the same policy, we should give ARIN enough money that it could incent current holders to return their space to the free pool, then allocate from the newly refilled pool to exactly the "right" people (those who most fit the established "fair" need-based policies).
Or of course tell people to get IPv6 addresses and figure IPv4 is going to get pretty ugly no matter what.
Matthew Kaufman _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
