[address-policy-wg] Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations

Hi,

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 04:22:15PM +0300, Vladimir Andreev wrote:
> I think you mix "preventing making profit" and "assure available IPv4 space to new entrants".
> 
> As I calculated (and presented my results some days ago) reselling has low impact on IPv4 exhaustion.
> 
> So the only reason (as I see it) is just to prevent earning money.
> 
> Therefore I have reasonable question: why do some members worry about someone's profit?

Because it's a common good, and not there to further individual members'
profit.  Or, as your mother might have said every now and then, "just
imagine what happens if everyone did this".

But you can stop this discussion now.

First, because it happens outside the formal process anyway, so whatever is
said is not relevant for the proposal anyway.

Second, because you've made your point fairly clear.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20150425/ed8a46f0/attachment.sig>