Socialism dies from economic failure or revolution. Needs tests are dead. But beware the #IANA Transition.
Best, -M< > On Dec 19, 2014, at 20:05, Mike Burns <[email protected]> wrote: > > How do we change to the Capitalistic model from what we got now? >> >> Steven L Ryerse > > > Thanks for the interesting discussion. > Might I say in answer to your question above that a step towards that change > would be 2014-14? > Small operators could purchase a /24 without a needs test, yet the needs test > remains in place for large transfers which some feel could imperil the market. > > And in this discussion there was suprising accord between Steven and Owen > relating to the proposal to impose annual needs testing on all resource > holders. I would suggest that the trading market imposes the most effective > ongoing needs-test of all. By their nature, corporations who recognize > unused but valuable and perishable assets in their possession will seek to > monetize them. The gimlet eye of the corporate accountant works unceasingly > to bring IPv4 addresses into efficient use through the transfer market in a > way that vague ARIN threats never could. We should work to make that market > more predictable and robust in order to best harness those efficiencies. > > > Long version of above, feel free to ignore: > > 2014-14 would remove much of the uncertainty in the market, since it would > cover most transactions and allow the buyer and seller to particpate without > the uncertainty introduced by third-party veto in the form of a failed > needs-test. IPv4 transactions are still a novel idea outside a small group of > people. Many international transactions have built-in levels of FUD which are > high even before considering the novelty of the core transaction and the > natural reluctance to wire an up-front international payment for an asset so > virtual in nature. > > Likewise for sellers, who are asked to initiate the transfer request with an > entity (ARIN) which may or may not consummate the transaction, at its sole > discretion. There is policy and procedure for the transfer of IPv4 resources > when the request follows policy, but what procedure and policy is available > to the seller if the transfer succeeds, but some contractual breach occurs > between buyer and seller whose penalty is the reversion of rights to the > Seller? Can the Seller sell his address rights under Net 30 terms, confident > that ARIN (and potentially and coordinatedly APNIC) would revert Whois > records to their original state if the breach could be demonstrated? Would > that breach have to be demonstrated to a judge first, would ARIN respond only > to a judge's order? Would ARIN respond to an Asian judge's order, or vice > versa? FUD. > > Can an IPv4 asset possibly function as security if it can not be reliably and > predictably transferred? I know a small business that wanted to borrow some > money and secure it with their IPv4 stock, and use the funds to grow their > business (thus utilizing their IPv4 stock). But who would make the loan if > they could never collect on the secured asset? > > As a broker it would make transactions simpler and smoother for buyers if I > could purchase a /16, have it as inventory, and then sell in, say, /24s. > Today, when buyers want a very small block it is hard for them to find a > broker interested, because the size makes it not worth the broker's time. And > when a seller comes to broker and wants to sell a /24, the same logic > applies. Few sellers with /16s are willing to endure 256 transactions in > order to monetize their block. Net result is wasted space and unmet need. But > if the broker had /16 in inventory and could eliminate all costs involved > with a Seller's participation, selling individual /24s might be profitable, > allowing the need of the smallest operator to be met. With 2014-14 it could > at least be attempted. > > If all involved knew that the RIRs would be passive registrars of the > transfers, FUD would be reduced and the market made more vital in my opinion. > > Regards, > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
