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

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:16 PM, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> Tore,
>
> On Sep 23, 2013, at 7:23 AM, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:
> > What I do not understand, is why anyone would expect that a company that
> has no need and no interest in IPv4 address space would go out and buy some.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speculation
>

That, and to hoard/safeguard for possible future use.

It happened time and again before we reached the last /8, and I think it
would be very weird if it hasn't happened under the current policy.

It will also continue to happen under the current policy, if this proposal
should fall.

I think that is one of the things that the opponents – including Sylvain –
keep forgetting or ignoring, that everything that's wrong (in their eyes)
with the _consequences_ of the proposal, is _already happening_ and has
been happening for quite some time.

I have a very hard time believing that people will _cease_ speculating or
hoarding/safeguarding just because this proposal wouldn't get implemented.

And the effort of having to put a few more words somewhere will not change
that.
-- 
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20130923/75b54976/attachment.html>