nanog mailing list archives
Re: economic value of low AS numbers
From: David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:21:59 -0800
On Nov 17, 2011, at 8:16 AM, Keegan Holley wrote:
Besides standing at the water cooler at 1:23PM on 12/3 telling AS123 jokes I'm not sure a particular AS number has any relevance or any monetary value unless there is scarcity.
You are discounting (pun intended) vanity and marketing. I am no longer surprised at what people will be willing to pay (sometimes astonishing amounts of) money for. Regards, -drc
Current thread:
- economic value of low AS numbers Dave Hart (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Sebastian Spies (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Leo Bicknell (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Dave Hart (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Kevin Loch (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Keegan Holley (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers David Conrad (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Hank Nussbacher (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Keegan Holley (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Richard Irving (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers David Conrad (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Dave Hart (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Daniel Roesen (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Barry Shein (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Jay Ashworth (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Jeffrey Ollie (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Robert E. Seastrom (Nov 17)
- Re: economic value of low AS numbers Keegan Holley (Nov 17)