> -----Original Message----- > I for one am a supporter of the needs basis. As I have said before, if we > eliminate the needs basis then I want to be first in line to request > everything > that is left. I am sure there will be quite a queue.
This comment is an example of the strange illogic that somehow permeates this debate. Eliminating needs basis AFTER there is no free pool doesn't mean that you get to request "everything that is left." There is nothing left to request. On the other hand, if a free pool still exists, keeping needs basis as a criterion could actually mean that one person, whoever is first in line, could request "everything that is left" if they could document need for it - even if 37 other organizations had the same need. Kevin's comments, in other words, seem to support exactly the opposite of the position he is upholding. > My perception is that the ARIN community is strongly biased to support > needs basis and there is a very vocal minority trying to eliminate it so that > they can create a market they can profit by. I don't read the opposition to The public interest case for eliminating needs basis is very clear. (I am an academic, by the way, not in any way connected to the brokerage or secondary market.) The feeling is that bureaucratic needs assessments introduce significant friction into the transfer process, making it more difficult for addresses to shift from people with a surplus to people who actually need them. It is the current system that is characterized by hoarding, not a freer market. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
