[address-policy-wg] Comment on IPv4 depletion rate for proposal 2015-05

On Tue, May 10, 2016, at 17:17, Jérôme Nicolle wrote:
> Hi Radu,
> 
> Le 10/05/2016 16:40, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN a écrit :
> > For now, I have the impression that the administrative overhead is just
> > a pretext to be able to say "nonono, we DO NOT sell IPv4 addresses".
> 
> IP adresses cannot be sold, it's public domain.
> 
> What's beeing sold is a service to ensure uniqueness and a well
> maintained registry. One-time fees won't cover that.

Jerome,

The problem is the "multiple LIR accounts per member". Of course, it
does arrange some members' business, but it still sounds like "purchase
parts in an investment fund".
OK, that situation is suspended since november, but follow-up on 27/05
(voting results).

One of the ideas behind 2015-05 was to calm down the need for such
practice. Some people do not agree, and some may start considering the
"extra LIR" option as normal.

Not to mention that some people simply do not agree with that and make a
more than decent living out of it.

> Whenever we decide to put a facial value onto adress blocks, we'd get in
> a slipery slope leading to the demise of innovation and competitive
> telecom market (re-read the taxi licence analogy). And it sure won't

Unfortunately we're already on the slippery slope. How far, check here :
https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/transfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics
.

--
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
fr.ccs