Re: Fwd: Suggestion: charging for IPv4 space

David and all,

  Ok agreed largely.  But don't you think much more can be done
via reclamation?

David Conrad wrote:

> Tom,
>
> >> This "barrier to entry" argument seems bogus to me.  If I wanted
> >> to  start a farm a couple of centuries back, I could go out into
> >> the wilderness, kill off some flora and fauna, stake a claim, and
> >> start farming.  Today, I have to buy or lease land from existing
> >> land owners.  Does this mean that no new farms are established?
> > The Rhodesians and the Zimbabweans, among others, would both
> > probably disagree with your factual claim, and with the policy
> > choices that it implies.
>
> I actually don't think they would disagree (it's all about money,
> after all), but OK in such cases there are a couple more options on
> how to get the land to start a farm: government intervention or
> squatting.  The policy options we're looking at for a new IPv4 entrant
> appear roughly similar to me, you can:
>
> a) buy or lease the address space from someone who has it;
> b) convince a government (or RIR) to assert eminent domain and give
> the appropriated address space to you; or,
> c) if you're big enough or have enough guns, squat on someone else's
> address space (which is just another form of (b)).
>
> The point is that this "barrier to entry" is an expected outcome of
> any consumable finite resource and when this has occurred in the past,
> it has resulted in new entrants making adjustments to their business
> plans (usually, to have to find more startup capital to buy/lease/
> bribe).  This may make it difficult or impossible to make the business
> case, just as it would hard to make the business case that I should
> start a farm in my neighborhood in Silicon Valley.  Maybe there are
> better ways I could spend my startup capital?
>
> The reality is that exhaustion of the IPv4 free pool and the resulting
> increase in the cost of obtaining IPv4 addresses _will_ drive more
> efficient use of IPv4 (leading to increased innovation in areas like
> renumbering, (multi-layer) NAT, NAT traversal, etc.) and _may_
> increase desirability of IPv6 (leading to increased innovation in
> mechanisms to allow IPv6 to interoperate with IPv4 more
> transparently).  Since the exhaustion of the IPv4 free pool is
> inevitable, it would seem to me we should focus on coming up with
> policies that increase the likelihood of the desirable outcome (IPv6
> deployment) and decrease the likelihood of the less desirable outcome
> (does _anyone_ actually want multi-layer NAT?) instead of wasting time
> rearranging deck chairs in order to let theoretical new entrants hop
> on board the Titanic (even if it is the only ship in the
> neighborhood)...
>
> Regards,
> -drc
>
> _______________________________________________
> global-v6 mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
[email protected]
My Phone: 214-244-4827



_______________________________________________
global-v6 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6