On 06/11/2007, John L <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
> I'm worried that for some regions the "TCO" to access scarce IPv4 space may
> be higher than in other regions. So uniform in a sense of geographic
> fairness, not in the sense of same policy for all.
Why not look at what the RIRs actually do rather than guessing?
Yes, I'm looking... It seems that each RIRs has got its own voice and is driven by its own constituency for policy formulation. And then there are the NICs,...
NB: I guess you must be an engineer to show so much social skills ;)
>> Honestly, ICANN knows a lot less about IP allocation than the RIRs do. I
>> don't think this is a good idea. If ICANN wants to do something useful
>> for the IP address community, turn up the community pressure to renumber
>> and recycle old underused allocations like MIT's 18/8 and Apple's 17/8.
>
> ICANN level means higher level than RIR level. The decision should be from a
> global body not a regional one.
Global IP space allocation is not a new issue. See
http://www.nro.net.
If you're worried about a black market in IP space, that's going to happen
no matter what ICANN does, so I wouldn't waste a lot of time trying to
stop it.
It is not about to stop it, but about to lessen its impact, till IPv6 is widely used.