* Mikael Abrahamsson > My gut feeling is that I do not want new LIRs created to acquire a /22, > immediately transfer it out, and close the LIR. Considering the market > price on IPv4 addresses I have seen and the cost of creating a LIR, this > would be below market price. > > Thus I support any measure that brings the /22 last /8 policy more in line > with market prices for IPv4 addresses, for instance by requiring that the > LIR exists and fees are paid total over the life of the LIR that'll bring > the cost-per-address closer to reality. > > If the current proposal means the minimmum cost of creating a new LIR, > getting /22 and closing it down is 2000EUR signup fee and 2*yearly fee > minimum (currently 1600EUR yearly fee according to > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-620) for a total of 5200 EUR, I am > fine with that.
Agreed. That said, €5200 is still half off compared to the supposed market price so I doubt that this policy proposal will stop sufficiently desperate people who actually need the addresses for themselves or their customers from going down the multiple LIRs route. It won̈́'t fully close the "register temporary LIR, get /22, instantly sell /22 to third party" loophole either, as the temporary LIR might simply sub-allocate or assign the space to his customer for the first two years, and afterwards transfer it and close the LIR. But the extra unavoidable yearly fees would cut into the possible profits, of course. Tore
