Re: [sig-policy] Prop 050(072) comments
On 24/03/2009 6:03, "Terence Zhang Yinghao" <zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn> wrote:
> > I've been trying to think through examples of unofficial markets for things
> > that are not allowed. Most of them seem to have higher prices than you would
> > see in a regulated, official market. Can you explain why you think people
> > would be willing to charge a lower price for something that was not allowed,
> > rather than charging a premium?
> >
> I have similar question in mind, why people will pay a premium for
> addresses while they can get it from RIR through allocation process?
One example that springs to mind is single-homed organisations that want a
small portable assignment. They don't appear to qualify under the current
IPv4 policy but might well decide that buying an assignment assures them of
IPv4 space in the years to come and removes the ongoing cost of renumbering
every time they change ISP.
> > You seem to have ignored the NIR's and the RIR's role in this. Do you not
> > have confidence in NIR's and RIR's abilities to correctly evaluate requests
> > that have been inflated?
> >
> I respect your experience in IP resources allocation and management,
> and I also believe our hostmasters are perfectly capable.
I'm glad to hear that both the NIR's and RIR's staff will not have problems
correctly evaluating inflated IPv4 requests. It is good to know that on
reflection this risk is not a real concern.
Kind regards,
Leo Vegoda