cb.list6 wrote: > > > > > > > > I am still against the proposal. > > > > As is your right. > > > > Who would benefit from hoarding? >
someone with an inventory they'd like to increase the value of. for example, see "california, electricity, enron". > Hoarding seems like economic "dumping", there are rules and policies > around it, but it has never really occured because the economics are > wrong. The market ensures dumping does not occur. > hoarding may seem like dumping to you but that's nobody's assertion here so let's not debate it. > Or like the FUD about walmart driving local business out and then > jacking up prices after competition is gone, its just fud. People made > a big noise about it 20 years ago, not any more. > > I think the market is only interestes in transactions. Ipv4 addresses > are like most cars, they depreciate rapidly so hoarding is not a real > thing. > those statements are fantastically naive. > And, with google fiber at 77% ipv6 and vzw over 25%, i must say i > would no hoard ipv4. > well, that's you. > But, my ask is, lets not assume hoarding or threats to ipv4 by bad > actors unless there is a real case that applies. > that argument often accompanies proposals involving deregulation. the invisible hand of the market sometimes does a lot of public harm before it's restrainted. see "greenhouse gas effect". let's instead use sound judgement when deciding our policies. > Afaik, arin brought transfers in to increase efficiency > indeed so, and if that goal hasn't been met, then by all means let's continue fine tuning the transfer mechanism. vixie _______________________________________________ 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.
