The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) were designed to manage Internet number resources fairly, regionally, and through community consensus. Yet transfer statistics tell a different story: some registries are becoming net gainers of IPv4 addresses, while others are steadily leaking resources into the global market.

This imbalance is not just a matter of accounting. It reveals how policy choices, fee structures, and community dynamics shape the incentives driving IPv4 transfers. The sustainability of the RIR system may depend on recognizing—and adapting to—these emerging realities.

RIPE as the Global Liquidity Hub

Over the past three years, RIPE NCC has consistently gained millions of IPv4 addresses while ARIN, APNIC, and more recently LACNIC, have leaked supply. Several factors explain RIPE’s unique position:

• Flat membership fee (€1,800 annually), regardless of holdings. This makes it cheap for large holders to consolidate.
• No needs-based justification for transfers, speeding up acquisitions.
• Predictable 24-month lock rules, easy to navigate for both buyers and sellers.
• Inter-RIR transfer support, enabling global inflows.
• Tolerant leasing posture, provided registry records remain accurate.

The result is that RIPE has become the global center of IPv4 liquidity. Hyperscalers, notably Microsoft, have favored RIPE for large-scale acquisitions because it combines speed, low costs, and legal clarity. Leasing markets also thrive, creating secondary revenue streams for holders.

In contrast, ARIN remains burdened by needs-based justification and size-based fees that escalate sharply with larger blocks. APNIC has imposed restrictions on its “final /8” pool and high membership costs, discouraging speculative holdings.

LACNIC’s 2025 Flip: A Warning Sign

For years, LACNIC maintained neutrality in address transfers. But in 2025, it became a net leaker, losing more than three million IPv4 addresses—the steepest single-year outflow on record.

The reason is clear: LACNIC’s strict prohibition on leasing and size-based fee model made surplus addresses liabilities rather than assets. Large members facing growing costs and limited monetization options chose to exit, moving resources to more flexible regions like RIPE.

This episode underscores a key lesson: rigid policy can backfire, triggering the very instability it aims to prevent.

AFRINIC: The Isolated Market

AFRINIC is the only registry that does not support inter-RIR transfers, cutting itself off from the global IPv4 economy. Combined with years of governance crises, lawsuits, and board suspensions, the region has become effectively irrelevant for large-scale acquisitions.

Even with moderate fees, AFRINIC is viewed as a dead end. Resources there are considered stranded assets—unattractive to hyperscalers, telcos, or enterprises. The result is a stagnant, inward-looking market with little hope of revival without major reform.

Fee Models: Incentives in Disguise

The way RIRs charge for membership is more than accounting—it directly shapes market behavior.

• Flat-fee model (RIPE NCC): Equal cost for small and large holders. This penalizes small networks but creates a paradise for large-scale consolidators.
• Size-based fees (ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC, AFRINIC): Costs rise sharply with block size. Affordable for small holders, but at scale, fees can reach tens of thousands annually.

This divergence explains why large holders migrate to RIPE while smaller networks in ARIN or APNIC often stay put. In LACNIC, the exponential growth of fees at higher tiers made it one of the most expensive regions for big operators, accelerating the 2025 outflows.

How Policy Shapes Business Strategy

For operators, these differences are not theoretical—they define real-world strategy.

• Telcos in RIPE vs. ARIN: In RIPE, a telco can acquire and lease large blocks without justification, paying a flat €1,800 fee regardless of size. In ARIN, the same holdings may cost tens of thousands annually, with strict reviews discouraging stockpiling.
• Hyperscaler acquisitions: Microsoft has actively acquired space in RIPE due to its speed and predictability. Meanwhile, ARIN remains the legacy base for AWS, Google, and Meta, but friction slows new acquisitions.
• Surplus holders in restrictive regions: In APNIC, high fees and 103/8 restrictions limit leasing options. In LACNIC, leasing is outright prohibited, making surplus addresses “dead capital.”

The net result: RIPE encourages accumulation and leasing, while other RIRs create exit incentives for large holders.

Systemic Risks: Fragility Beneath the Surface

The financial stability of RIRs depends heavily on their revenue models.

• Flat-fee registries (RIPE): At risk if membership numbers decline.
• Size-based registries (ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC, AFRINIC): Vulnerable if a handful of large contributors exit.

In ARIN and APNIC, 10—20% attrition among top-tier members could wipe out millions in annual revenue. In LACNIC and AFRINIC, even smaller shocks would be destabilizing given their limited budgets.

Compounding the issue is policy inertia. RIR communities are aging, with few new participants joining policy forums. Without renewal, bold reforms are unlikely. Governance disputes, as seen in AFRINIC, further erode trust.

The danger is a feedback loop:

• Outflows and attrition reduce revenue.
• Registries raise fees or cut services.
• Members perceive less value and accelerate their exit.

Once this cycle begins, it is difficult to reverse.

Building Sustainable RIRs

To avoid long-term instability, RIRs must evolve beyond their traditional role as custodians of scarce resources. Several steps are essential:

• Deliver modern tools and automation: Unified APIs, stronger RPKI capabilities, and interoperable registry systems across regions.
• Standardize compliance and processes: Harmonize KYC, transfer audits, and abuse-contact verification to reduce friction and prevent policy arbitrage.
• Renew the community: Attract younger operators, cloud providers, and developers through fellowships, hackathons, and open tooling initiatives.
• Collaborate on open-source registry stacks: Pool resources across RIRs to reduce costs, increase transparency, and accelerate innovation.
• Reposition as enablers, not just gatekeepers: Provide value-added services, training, and modern infrastructure to keep members engaged.

Conclusion

Transfer statistics show a clear reality: RIPE is the consistent net gainer, while ARIN, APNIC, and now LACNIC leak supply year after year. AFRINIC remains cut off entirely.

These trends are not accidents—they are the predictable outcomes of policy, fee models, and governance choices. If left unchecked, they threaten the financial stability of registries and the balance of the global IPv4 ecosystem.

The path forward is clear. RIRs must modernize their technology, harmonize their compliance processes, and renew their communities. Only then can they remain sustainable and relevant in an internet that demands flexibility, transparency, and trust.

This article is part of a bigger study. Read the full text here.