Also, there's nothing new here. IPv4 prefixes have been considered as assets in bankruptcies, mergers and acquisitions for many years. I believe that when ATT acquired the IBM Global Network for $US5B in 1999, they got two very lightly used /8s as part of the deal, for example. Everybody serious has known that IPv4 would run out since the early 1990s, so I doubt if the actual IANA runout has really affected the grey market price. In fact this is why we wrote RFC 1881 in 1995, so that the situation would be clear for IPv6 from the start. Regards Brian Carpenter On 2011-03-25 10:00, Jay Daley wrote:
As often found with media stories, the truth is more complicated and less exciting. See the comments from the ARIN CEO at the bottom of this article:
http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/3/23/4778509.html
Jay
On 25/03/2011, at 9:56 AM, Andy Linton wrote:
Are Microsoft not completely committed to the IPv6 process or are they just hedging their bets?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/24/microsoft_ip_spend/ _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog