RE: IPv4 addresses eaten by... what? (was: IPv6 standard)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tony,

[top-posting since that's what you did]

AIUI, the intention is not for the RIRs to be "controlling the market",
but rather to provide the same value they do now: a location where I can
see who is responsible for a given address.

I think the RIRs all have a transfer policy now. So when a prefix is
sold, what amounts to a transfer of deed needs to happen, the same as if
you buy or otherwise acquire land. This is not control of IP sales any
more than the local town deed registry controls the real estate market.

--
Shane

On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 10:13 -0700, Tony Hain wrote:
> Look at http://www.nro.net/ for the current process. Look at
> http://www.ebay.com/ for the process once the IANA & RIR pools are
> allocated. There are misguided fantasy discussions about controlling the
> market in the RIR context, but given that their charters explicitly say that
> they make no statement about the utility or routing of any allocation, they
> have absolutely no leverage on whatever transactions a market might produce.
> Look to the CIDR deployment filtering wars to see that the business side of
> each ISP will beat down the technical side every time, so expect that the
> routing system will routinely carry /28-29 IPv4 prefixes in a few years.


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]