[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

On Saturday, October 22, 2016, Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:

> Hi Arash,
>
> > If old businesses depend on selling IPv4 address to new comers and now
> > looking to put some more value on their old blocks, their strategy should
> > not be supported by 2016-03.
>
> I'm sorry, but it's doing the opposite: it will make sure that the
> remaining pool is not drained by traders, keeping it available for longer
> for new companies that need them. If the "cheap" pool for newcomers runs
> out and address transfers become the *only* source for addresses, guess
> what will happen to the prices.


I've heared this story over and over. Let's protect the pool, let's not
waste it and now, after 4 years the pool is almost the same size. Again,
what is our purpose here ? Where is the imagined abuse ? Bring up some
actual statistics not fake scary scenarios.

Ciprian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20161023/fb412be2/attachment.html>