On Sep 24, 2014, at 12:42 PM, Matthew Kaufman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Interesting document. > > I do disagree with the conclusion for "encouraging transition" in some cases. > For instance, should a wealthy network buy up all IPv4 in order to avoid > transition, doesn't that scarcity force every other network to transition to > IPv6 more quickly? Impossible to know - it is equally possible to cause parties to avoid IPv6 on the assumption that such large networks are not migrating... > I also note that it only weakly touches on the idea of future sales > contracts, though we have some anecdotal evidence that this is exactly what > "wealthy network operators" are doing right now. Future sales contracts are not a mechanism that would occur in policy, so they are not directly addressed by the paper. > Both "conservation" and "excluding speculators" are modified significantly in > their meaning if we have big players locking up exclusive access to /8s via > these kinds of contracts. For instance, under "Maintain needs assessment as > is" the conclusion is (incorrectly) "Conservation: ... This keeps addresses > available for others. Wealth alone is not sufficient to claim addresses." You omitted the paragraph which follows - ".. As in all approaches evaluated in this document, speculators can enter into forward contracts in order to capture the economic substance of a transaction without formal recognition by ARIN." i.e. the conclusion is accurate but the result (as acknowledged in the paper) limited to the extent that ARIN policy is followed. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN _______________________________________________ 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.
