Re: IPV4 as a Commodity for Profit

[Geoff Huston <gih () apnic net>]

David Conrad wrote:
> Steve,
>
> On Feb 18, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> > > This is a strong argument for regulation of the market.  A regulated
> > > market could provide liquidity needed by those who would otherwise
> > > find <unregulated> means to accomplish their ends (such as making
> > > private deals that are perhaps undetectable).
> >
> > I have no problem with regulating markets -- I tend to think they work
> > better that way.
>
> Given the decentralized nature of the Internet and the lack of a single 
> legal/policy regime that covers it, the challenge is in identifying 
> viable candidates for the regulator.

That is a big challenge in this space, considering that there is no 
particular national alignment in the address structure.

The approach in the proposals so far is to attempt to create a framework 
around recognition of market-based outcomes that act as implicit 
constraints on the market. The proposals so far for recognition of 
address transfers in ARIN, RIPE and APNIC all attempt to define a class 
of transactions that would be regarded as eligible for entering in 
their respective address registries. That said, they each propose a 
different set of constraints!

   Geoff