On 16 Feb 2016, at 15:13, Matthias Šubik wrote:
This is essential what we want: make *new* IPv4 deployment more expensive, to all migrate to a hopeful brighter IPv6 future.
What you are saying is that the RIPE NCC should price out new entrant from IPv4. Do you think that it may look a lot like a Cartel behaviour falling under european antitrust laws ? (This is a rhetorical question - let’s not start this debate - I just want to show a possible shortcoming of this line of thought)
Old players also have incentive to sell address space, instead of hoarding it, as a possible IPv6 world devalues the asset.
If the price goes up .. I would not SELL such an asset: the transfer or purchase of IP are not the only way to give another organisation access to some IP space. If you have an ASN and IP space you can simply ‘lease it’ by letting the organisation route your traffic and use the IP and milk the asset even more. So whatever rule in put in place it may simply may do NOTHING to prevent cross organisation IP usage. And some serious thought must be given to the real effectiveness of the change proposed. Thomas