[187998] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: About inetnum "ownership"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Mar 2 04:18:16 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <9578293AE169674F9A048B2BC9A081B401C9C011E0@MUNPRDMBXA1.medline.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:47:56 -0800
To: "Naslund, Steve" <SNaslund@medline.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 08:50 , Naslund, Steve <SNaslund@medline.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> Oh, and I forgot to add...the number in and of itself does not have a =
value. The right to use that number within the Internet connected =
network is what has value.
But that=E2=80=99s not what RIRs give you.
RIRs have no control over your right to use the number within the =
context of any network.
RIRs merely provide a record of unique registrations among cooperating =
registries.
Most network operators currently use this database as a basis for =
granting permissions to use the numbers within their network contexts, =
but any network operator that wants to is free to assign any number they =
wish to any purpose or entity they so choose. Your network, your rules.
Turns out, that since most network operators follow the RIR database, =
it=E2=80=99s hard to find peers that will accept your announcement of =
=E2=80=9Coff-list=E2=80=9D usage of addresses, but that=E2=80=99s not an =
inherent right conveyed in the registration of an address within the RIR =
system.
Owen
>=20
> Steven Naslund
> Chicago IL
>=20
>=20
> Simple to answer. =20
>=20
> 1. Address space is finite in size, therefore in the V4 space more =
people want addresses than there is available space. Hence it has value =
because demand exceeds supply.
>=20
> 2. Managing address space allocations is not a zero cost effort, =
therefore the RIRs charge a price for that. Anything that costs money =
to acquire presumably has value.
>=20
> Steven Naslund
> Chicago IL
>=20
>> On Feb 22, 2016, at 2:03 AM, J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Nicolle =
<jerome@ceriz.fr> wrote:
>>=20
>> Hi,
>>=20
>> How come we've had an inetnum market in place whereas an inetnum=20
>> cannot have a market value ?
>>=20
>> It's my understanding that the IP adress space is nothing but numbers=20=
>> and that RIR/LIRs are only responsible for the uniqueness of=20
>> allocations and assignements, that is, a transfer of liability over a=20=
>> shared and common immaterial resource, between community members.
>>=20
>> I'm wondering how did we made "Temporary and conditionnal liabality=20=
>> transfer" a synonym of "perpetual and inconditional usufruct =
transfer".
>>=20
>> May you please enlight me ?
>>=20
>> Thanks !
>>=20
>> --
>> J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Nicolle
>> +33 6 19 31 27 14
