nanog mailing list archives
Re: Non-profit IP Registry
From: David Schwartz <davids () wiznet net>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:54:07 -0500 (EST)
There is a VERY serious flaw in this plan.
The effective pricing drops with size. Yet the registry is
technically required to be stingy in its IP allocations.
Can you say "lawsuit"? I knew you could.
Imagine if ivory sold large bars and small bars and the small
bars were more cost effective. Then they would only sell you a small bar
because you wouldn't need the large bar for a few months, thus causing
you to pay more.
Think about it.
David Schwartz
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry, (continued)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Dorian R. Kim (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Eliot Lear (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Avi Freedman (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Kim Hubbard (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Todd R. Stroup (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Paul R.D. Lantinga (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Bob Collie (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Eric D. Madison (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry David Stoddard (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Marc Slemko (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry David Schwartz (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Daryn D. Fisher (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Marc Slemko (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry David R. Conrad (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Daryn D. Fisher (Jan 02)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Robert J. Fehn Sr. (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Alex.Bligh (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Joe Pace (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Wayne Bouchard (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Todd R. Stroup (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Paul Ferguson (Jan 03)
- Re: Non-profit IP Registry Thomas Narten (Jan 04)
