-----Original Message----- > With an exhausted IPv4 pool, there are no "pool limitations at the > time of allocation" as there are no allocations. ARIN's role in IPv4 is > primarily the third goal above: registry accuracy. > > That's why I advocate removing needs-basis from transfers in a post- > exhaustion world. There's no pool to manage[1], so the only OFFICIAL > mandate ARIN has from the network operator community is to run > an accurate registry.
I agree with David. Needs assessment was designed to be a rationing mechanism that filled in the gap left by the absence of a price system for Ipv4 addresses. Because ARIN hands out free pool number blocks for free, the absence of needs assessment would provoke a first come first served land rush and subsequent tragedy of the commons. Once you reach exhaust, however, no one gets number blocks for free, everyone must pay a market price for them. The rationale for needs assessment is totally gone. Restricting transfers in this environment _will_ inevitably produce inaccuracies in the registry data. _______________________________________________ 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.
