RE: IP addresses are now assets

[Robert Bonomi <bonomi () mail r-bonomi com>]

> From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com () nanog org  Fri Dec  2 13:29:31 2011
> From: Leigh Porter <leigh.porter () ukbroadband com>
> To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>,
>         Leo Bicknell
>  <bicknell () ufp org>
> Subject: RE: IP addresses are now assets
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 19:29:43 +0000
> Cc: NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:streiner () cluebyfour org]
> > Sent: 02 December 2011 19:26
> > To: Leo Bicknell
> > Cc: NANOG
> > Subject: Re: IP addresses are now assets
> >
> > On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> >
> > > In a message written on Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 11:04:23PM -0500,
> > Michael R. Wayne wrote:
> > > >    After negotiating with multiple prospective buyers, Cerner Corp.
> > > >    agreed to buy the Internet addresses for $12 each. Other bids
> > were
> > > >    as low as $1.50 each, according to a bankruptcy court filing.
> > >
> > > Someone should tell Cerner Corp you can still get them for free,
> > > and thus they overpaid by oh, $12 an address!
> >
> > I'm waiting for someone to come back and balk at $12/address, and try
> > to
> > reduce the number of addresses they buy, forgetting that pesky powers-
> > of-two
> > business:  "In the interest of containing the cost of the deal, XYZ
> > Corp has
> > agreed to buy 27,000 addresses instead of the original 65,536."
> >
> > That will be a definite facepalm moment.
> >
> > jms
>
>
> So about a /18 a /19 a /21 and a /23 then ;-)

Methinks it ought to be restricted to some combination of a /17, a /19, a /23,
a /29, and a /31.  It's all 'prime' number-space, after all.   <groan.