[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)

On 25/07/2013 20:49, Tore Anderson wrote:
> I would actually claim that this is not difficult to pull off under
> today's policy either.

no, indeed.  btw, I'm not trying to imply that 2013-03 will cause hoarding
and market skew - I'm just thinking out loud here and trying to understand
how the proposal might affect the address market in the future.

>> leading to reduction in market liquidity,
> 
> The numbers I posted in my previous message suggest that the market is
> only supplying 3-4% of actual demand

on face value, this is not good but it's also interesting to note that ipv4
address demand is not so furious that people are desperate enough to go out
and register large quantities of LIRs.  This suggests that the cost of
€4/address + hassle is too high for people to want to bother doing it in bulk.

> to pay the most). Lather, rinse, repeat.

yep, agreed.

>> historically, two things: the presence of policies which make it difficult
>> to transfer large amount of address space from many different sources,
> 
> Could you point out which part/passage of the policy you're referring to
> here?

the two things I pointed out are artefacts of current policy, not features
of 2013-03.

> So just to make sure I have not misunderstood you here, you are also
> accepting the following argument to be equally valid (or invalid) as the
> one you wrote above?
> 
> "we need to understand that it is a bad idea to put any faith in the
> requirement to demonstrate need rule as a means of regulating the
> market, or to believe that the rule will stay there as a long term fixture."

yes, correct.

As I said, I'm not arguing in favour or against 2013-03 here, but just
trying to understand its potential consequences.  Broadly speaking, I think
it's probably a rather good policy, but as it's such a fundamental shift
away from all previous policy and practices, it's important to have
discussions like this so that we understand the changes we're making.

Nick