[members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple

On 16 Feb 2016, at 15:13, Matthias Šubik wrote:

> This is essential what we want: make *new* IPv4 deployment more 
> expensive, to all migrate to a hopeful brighter IPv6 future.

What you are saying is that the RIPE NCC should price out new entrant 
from IPv4.
Do you think that it may look a lot like a Cartel behaviour falling 
under european antitrust laws ?
(This is a rhetorical question - let’s not start this debate - I just 
want to show a possible shortcoming of this line of thought)

> Old players also have incentive to sell address space, instead of 
> hoarding it, as a possible IPv6 world devalues the asset.

If the price goes up .. I would not SELL such an asset: the transfer or 
purchase of IP are not the only way to give another organisation access 
to some IP space.
If you have an ASN and IP space you can simply ‘lease it’ by letting 
the organisation route your traffic and use the IP and milk the asset 
even more.

So whatever rule in put in place it may simply may do NOTHING to prevent 
cross organisation IP usage.
And some serious thought must be given to the real effectiveness of the 
change proposed.

Thomas