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
>
