[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

On 20.02.2015 12:49, Martin Millnert wrote:
> Is the intent of the original policy is to exclude new entrants from
> competing with established service providers?

I would formulate it like "it is a not so bad side-effect that the
current big players don't need to fear new players" ... otherwise it is
not understandable, why some big players are sitting on their not (and
sometimes never before) used IPv4-Space instead of returning it.

As already mentioned in GM in Warsaw, a pretty easy way to relax the
IPv4-Situation in RIPE-Region would be to change the charging-scheme to
pay per IP ... but that's out of scope of apwg ... so let's stay with

"It is only an unintended side-effect."

BR
-- 
Jens Ott

Opteamax GmbH

Simrockstr. 4b
53619 Rheinbreitbach

Tel.:  +49 2224 969500
Fax:   +49 2224 97691059
Email: jo at opteamax.de

HRB: 23144, Amtsgericht Montabaur
Umsatzsteuer-ID.: DE264133989