[125049] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Behold - the Address-Yenta!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Thu Apr 8 15:54:43 2010
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100408193932.GA10217@vacation.karoshi.com.>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:51:47 -1000
To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
BIll,
On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:39 AM, bmanning@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.
>=20
> er... you misunderstand... there is no single "DFZ" anywhere...
Pedantry alert.
> Addresses are not sellable property. =20
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.
>> Given a demand and a supply, markets don't traditionally need a whole
>> lot of help to come into being.
>=20
> 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...
Regards,
-drc
