People will do it if it makes sense. Multicast was meant to solve the content distribution problem, but the people with money decided to put lots of servers everywhere and let them be clever instead of routers. If leasing IP space makes it easier to get to the whole internet than hoping everyone moves to the new protocol, then why waste time on the new protocol? As Jon mentioned, we already lease IP addresses, we just haven't taken it to the point where we route it to wherever we want.

On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Dean Pemberton <dean@internetnz.net.nz> wrote:

Hi All,

The subject line is a question I posed to Geoff Huston years ago in response to us both musing what the price to purchase address space would be.

I suggested that if it really got that bad, people would be asking about leasing by the hour rather than buying outright.

That time looks to be upon us. �While not explicitly allowed, nor disallowed by APNIC policy, IP address leasing is becoming a hot topic of discussion on relevant APNIC lists.

Should it be allowed?
Should it be disallowed?
It it were disallowed would that actually stop it?
What mechanisms need to be in place to keep it sane? �A 'whowas' server for eg
Should someone be able to be allocated addresses under a needs based policy just so they can make money leasing them?

Does leasing addresses mean that you no longer need them? �Should you be required to return the ?

These and many more issues are questions I'd like you all to give me feed back on.

This topic will come up in APRICOT 2014 in Thailand. �I'd like to know a lot more about what you all think about it before I take the mic.

Regards

Dean

--
--
Dean Pemberton

Technical Policy Advisor
InternetNZ
+64 21 920 363 (mob)
dean@internetnz.net.nz

To protect and promote the Internet for New Zealand.

_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
NZNOG@list.waikato.ac.nz
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog