[address-policy-wg] Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations

I can't remain indifferent to such interesting proposal :)

So I have to continue (no matter has it formal impact or not).

25.04.2015, 16:28, "Gert Doering" <gert at space.net>:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 04:22:15PM +0300, Vladimir Andreev wrote:
>>  I think you mix "preventing making profit" and "assure available IPv4 space to new entrants".
>>
>>  As I calculated (and presented my results some days ago) reselling has low impact on IPv4 exhaustion.
>>
>>  So the only reason (as I see it) is just to prevent earning money.
>>
>>  Therefore I have reasonable question: why do some members worry about someone's profit?
>
> Because it's a common good, and not there to further individual members'
> profit.  Or, as your mother might have said every now and then, "just
> imagine what happens if everyone did this".
>
> But you can stop this discussion now.
>
> First, because it happens outside the formal process anyway, so whatever is
> said is not relevant for the proposal anyway.
>
> Second, because you've made your point fairly clear.
>
> Gert Doering
>         -- NetMaster
> --
> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
>
> SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
> D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

-- 
With best regards, Vladimir Andreev
General director, QuickSoft LLC
Tel: +7 903 1750503