On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:51:47AM -1000, David Conrad wrote: > BIll, > > On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:39 AM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > >> If you're not planning to announce a route into the DFZ, we have > >> RFC1918 or IPv6's ULA, address pools that are 100% and completely free > >> for your use. > > > > er... you misunderstand... there is no single "DFZ" anywhere... > > Pedantry alert.
yeah yeah yeah... you passed that class last century. why are you still here? > > > Addresses are not sellable property. > > Sure they are. I personally know of several cases where addresses have been > sold. Right now, people have to go through a bunch of foo, creating dummy > companies to hold the IP address assets, transferring the assets, selling the > dummy companies, etc., but the end result is the same. Policy changes will > make this somewhat less silly. Whether those policy changes will be > sufficient to stop the creation of alternative "address title registries" > remains to be seen. you might want to let the ARIN GC know of the particulars here. selling dummy companies is not selling address space (technically). > >> Given a demand and a supply, markets don't traditionally need a whole > >> lot of help to come into being. > > > > Ok... lets say there is a pent up supply ... and no good way to > > let those with demand know the supply exists. I'll consider > > acting as the "address Yenta" --- if folks have prefixes they > > are not using, and would like to let others know there is availablity, > > I'll be glad to be the "go between". > > Given current address space utilization efficiency, it isn't hard to find > folks who have more address space than they are using. However, I suspect > there are VCs who would be interested in discussing the idea... bring them on. VC's are you listening? > > Regards, > -drc >