On 10/5/2015 1:07 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Let me give you a real world example.
1. Buy rights to use addresses in any quantity you believe you need
2. Use those addresses as you need them, assuming the agreement you
made with the party works properly
3. Get an LOA from the documented owner
4. Bypass ARIN entirely
5. Use the addresses.
How do you think we should solve that problem?
How about another real-world example (several of these in play that I
know of)
1. Enter into a contract to acquire addresses in any quantity you
believe you need (or more)
2. Not use the addresses right now, but know that you have as many as
you want locked up from that seller, who can't sell to anyone else now
3. Transfer the addresses if/when ARIN policy permits
4. Use the addresses.
There is absolutely nothing in the current needs-based policy that
ensures that entities that failed to plan for IPv4 runout and do not
have sufficient cash to bid against entities engaged in this sort of
practice will be able to get IPv4 addresses on the transfer market. And
there is nothing about removing needs basis from the transfer policy
that will change that. The game is already over, why insist on policies
that no longer make any sense in the current environment?
Matthew Kaufman
_______________________________________________
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.
