nanog mailing list archives
Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd)
From: Geoff Huston <gih () telstra net>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 08:23:45 +1000
Of course this scenario breaks down quickly.. Listed registrant A "sells" to B who "sells" to C who... Now the sucker who "buys" from C has the problem of tracing authenticity of the "title" C is selling. This is not easy, particularly if B is less than scrupulous and has "sold" title to a number of folk including C, or if C is unscrupulous and is "selling" without have concluded and transaction with B. The Land Titles office is there for a damn fine reason. We ignore the seeds of destructive anarchy in the IP address space at our collective risk (or is that peril?) regards, Geoff
Given the registries do not allow for outright transfers of this sort directly (see RFC 2050), one course of action would be for the original "owner" to sell the "right of use" of the /16. Of course, the appropriate action (according to RFC 2050 and historical Internet culture) would be for the original "owner" to return address space they don't need... Regards, -drc
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd), (continued)
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Brett L. Hawn (Mar 10)
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd) bmanning (Mar 10)
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Paul A Vixie (Mar 10)
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Hank Nussbacher (Mar 10)
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Bill Manning (Mar 10)
- Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Karl Denninger (Mar 09)
- Routing Information guard (was Class "B" forsale ) Ichiro Mizukoshi (Mar 09)
- RE: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Michael Shields (Mar 10)
- RE: Class "B" forsale (fwd) Alex P. Rudnev (Mar 10)