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
> 

Reply via email to