IP addresses are now assets
jcurran at arin.net
Fri Dec 2 15:39:19 CST 2011
On Dec 2, 2011, at 2:37 PM, joshua sahala wrote:
> intangible asset
> An asset that is not a physical thing and only evidenced by a
> written document.
> the addresses are being exchanged for money, in order to pay a
> debt...how is this not a sale of an asset?
Rights to addresses (in the registration database) are being
transferred for money. Those rights may indeed be "assets"
(although that's likely a question better suited for lawyers)
Perhaps "Rights to IP addresses can be sold!" would be a better
title, but it's not exactly newsworthy since we've all known that
for some time: <http://www.circleid.com/posts/psst_interested_in_some_lightly_used_ip_addresses/>
>> ARIN holds that IP address space is not property but is managed as a> public resource.
> imho, if it were truly a 'public resource' and managed as such, it
> would be returned to the appropriate rir for reassignment, rather than
> being auctioned off to the highest bidder by a (commodities) broker...
Agreed. However, attempting fairly to administrate a resource
as it becomes increasingly scarce is quite problematic, and yet
there is a real need emerging among network operators for IPv4
space as the regional free pool diminishes. The limited market
mechanism provides a motivation for getting these resources back
into use, while still taking the communities need for accurate
record keeping and avoidance of deaggregation into consideration.
> administrative and processing fees are one thing, but this is
> pure commoditisation of a so-called 'public resource' by speculators.
> i am, unfortunately, in the minority on this topic
It shouldn't be speculators, unless they're particularly skilled
at faking the operational need for the space they're obtaining
and willing to risk losing the entire investment if detected.
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:33 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> "Sale may be subject to compliance with certain requirements of
>> the American Registry of Internet Numbers ("ARIN") and the court
>> materials to date reflect this.
> MAY versus WILL -- rfc2119 contains a pretty clear definition of each,
> which i am pretty sure echoes legal precedent..but again, ianal, so,
> ymmv, etc, etc
I referenced that language because it is in the public solicitation.
Actual legal documents on transfers to date have been quite explicit
on this point.
> the speculative market exists and is growing, why do certain factions
> of the community keep trying to pretend that it doesn't?
Again, there is a limited market emerging in IPv4 address space, one
in which the transfer recipient must demonstrate an operational need.
Attempting to use the transfer policy to speculate would be rather
adventurous (since one must agree contractually to compliance with
the registry policies and to the veracity of the information on the
transfer request...) That doesn't mean it won't happen, only that we
hope that it will not get materially in the way of service providers
who do need additional address space.
President and CEO
More information about the NANOG