On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Jason Schiller <[email protected]> wrote: > The point here is the free pool being empty is only a snapshot in time, so I > would challenge any argument that suggests we should remove needs based > allocation / assignments once ARIN's free pool depletes.
Hi Jason, On the other hand, one could apply needs-based assignment only to whatever addresses are present in the free pool at the time of the request. The assumption (unproven) is that the money which changes hands as part of a transfer from one registrant to another is sufficient to guarantee efficient utilization. This doesn't remove needs basis but it does change its scope. IMO, the problem in such an approach is not the stated assumption but the unstated one: that the offer of money will be sufficient to assure address availability on the market. Look at any of the free markets where leaseholds are common to see that failing to occur. But that seems to be a problem with all of the kinds of needs-based assignment that has been contemplated here too. If I wanted to buy a /24 right now (with needs justification) where would I go to find one? Who has one for sale? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 _______________________________________________ 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.
