Matt Harris VP OF INFRASTRUCTURE Follow us on LinkedIn! matt.har...@netfire.net 816-256-5446 www.netfire.com On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 7:15 AM Bill Woodcock <wo...@pch.net> wrote:
> Removing the program, with its criteria and fees, would not stop the > practice. I will be the first to admit that, when I was on the ARIN board, > I was completely against commercial brokerage of IP addresses, as a matter > of principle. I believed that IP addresses, when no longer needed, should > be returned to the RIR for redistribution as needed. Like phone numbers, > for instance. Now, however, I believe that there is a reasonable market > niche for a few brokers, and that ARIN keeping a check on bad behavior in > that space is valuable. > > -Bill > Hey folks, I think we're missing a lot here. The incentives to return unused resources are extremely small. There is a much greater incentives to sell or lease the space. If selling the space outright by transferring it - often through a broker - were no longer an option, most organizations would simply sit on it or would lease it out, the latter situation is more useful to spammers and others who use space on a temporary and not permanent or semi-permanent basis, and increased competition from those who cannot sell the space would drive prices down for leasing: this is very good for spammers and other bad actors who will simply walk away from addresses when the lease is up and they are burned by blacklists, and very bad for legitimate service providers of all sorts who need space that they intend to be decent stewards of. I'd also love to see IPv4 deprecated and just move to a 100% v6 native internet. I've contributed to efforts to do that in what little ways are possible, like making sure my customers have IPv6 implemented properly, sharing information about it and about various events over the past decade or so, etc. But we're still not there, and in reality, we're still not close. IPv4 is a necessity, whether we like that fact or not. So understanding those two points, I don't see why increasing fees on facilitators such that it is not a big deal for the largest players, but pushes smaller competitors out of the market, benefits anyone really. Having increased competition almost always benefits a market as a general rule, and $10,000 can be a lot for an organization that is just getting started or, that performs this role as a secondary business rather than their primary one. So for those reasons, my feeling is that Tom's grievance is legitimate, and these sorts of discussions should indeed be discussions we have prior to changes to these fee schedules and policies being made. - mdh
_______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
