[AusNOG] /20 Available

[Jacob Gardiner]

Although I know there's always going to be loopholes when there's
situations where companies start acquiring companies (Like what Microsoft
did) in order to acquire assets, including IP resources, I think the
process of buying and selling should probably be governed by the regional
internet registry. Streamline the process as much as possible but properly
evaluate the requirement for acquiring the IP addresses and make sure the
motive isn't to simply buy and sell.

Would it be tedious? Yes.
Is it required? I think so, yes.

IPv4 is going to be a sheetfight over the next few years unless trade is
regulated. Those of us who will legitimately need more address space are
doomed whilst these "brokers" who actually provide no value to what we do
collect a cheque on the way through.

If company X no longer requires the resources, surely their 'justification'
for the allocation is no longer valid.


On 21 January 2013 09:32, Scott Howard <scott at doc.net.au> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Skeeve Stevens <
> skeeve+ausnog at eintellego.net> wrote:
>
>> Why is the parallel not good?
>>
>
> Because it's completely pointless to compare two different products, both
> of which have their own terms and conditions.  It's those terms and
> conditions that will control things like whether you can transfer them
> between entities, not the fact that they are both things that happen to be
> used on the Internet.
>
> As it happens, both sets to terms and condition do happen to have rules
> around transfer, but that doesn't make the analogy good.
>
>   Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>


-- 
Jacob Gardiner
@jacobgardiner <http://twitter.com/jacobgardiner>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130121/748ddaf9/attachment.html>