About inetnum "ownership"
SNaslund at medline.com
Mon Feb 22 16:50:43 UTC 2016
Oh, and I forgot to add...the number in and of itself does not have a value. The right to use that number within the Internet connected network is what has value.
Simple to answer.
1. Address space is finite in size, therefore in the V4 space more people want addresses than there is available space. Hence it has value because demand exceeds supply.
2. Managing address space allocations is not a zero cost effort, therefore the RIRs charge a price for that. Anything that costs money to acquire presumably has value.
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 2:03 AM, Jérôme Nicolle <jerome at ceriz.fr> wrote:
> How come we've had an inetnum market in place whereas an inetnum
> cannot have a market value ?
> It's my understanding that the IP adress space is nothing but numbers
> and that RIR/LIRs are only responsible for the uniqueness of
> allocations and assignements, that is, a transfer of liability over a
> shared and common immaterial resource, between community members.
> I'm wondering how did we made "Temporary and conditionnal liabality
> transfer" a synonym of "perpetual and inconditional usufruct transfer".
> May you please enlight me ?
> Thanks !
> Jérôme Nicolle
> +33 6 19 31 27 14
More information about the NANOG