Global Internet number resources, like IP addresses, are managed by five Regional Internet Registries (RIRs):
- American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) manages the allocation and registration of number resources for North America and parts of the Caribbean.
- Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) does the same across Latin America and most Caribbean nations.
- RIPE Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) for Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Central Asia.
- Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) for Asia, Australia, and the Pacific region.
- African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) across the African continent.
Within the global IPv4 transfer market, there is a perception among some buyers that address space originating from the LACNIC registry is somehow less attractive or less functional than space from ARIN, RIPE, or APNIC [AFRINIC lacks policy to allow for inter-regional transfers; thus, they are omitted from this part of the discussion]. This view occasionally manifests in pricing discussions or buyer preferences, where LACNIC-originated address blocks are sometimes treated as if they carry a structural disadvantage. In fact, LACNIC space functions the same as ARIN, RIPE NCC, or APNIC space. Moreover, once LACNIC space is transferred to an organization within another registry region, and the transfer is completed under the applicable policies, the address space becomes registered and administered by the receiving RIR. From that point forward, it is governed by the receiving registry and operates no differently from any other address space within that region.
In practice, this perception can stem from assumptions that such space may be harder to transfer between registries, less familiar to buyers who have historically focused on ARIN or RIPE allocations or potentially associated with different historical usage patterns (how the address block was previously used on the Internet).
Some buyers also worry about future liquidity or resale flexibility compared to address space originating in regions that historically dominated the transfer market. However, these concerns are typically rooted more in market habit (such as historically low LACNIC-to-other-RIR transfer volumes) rather than in technical or operational realities.
2020 = 14 subnets, ~33K addresses
2021 = 26 subnets, ~248K
2022 = 20 subnets, ~384K
2023 = 31 subnets, ~96K
2024 = 6 subnets, ~25K
2025 = 448 subnets, ~7.1 million
While transfer volumes alone do not determine market attractiveness, they do provide insight into how participants perceive and value address space.
As the figures above show, 2025 was an unprecedented year for LACNIC transfers. However, approximately 99% of the transferred addresses were part of an internal corporate transfer from V.tal, Brazil’s fibre infrastructure company, to its ARIN-based subsidiary, Globenet Cabos Submarinos America. Because operational control of the address space remained within the same corporate group, these transfers are generally excluded when assessing the size and liquidity of the broader LACNIC transfer market.
Scarcity Is Global, Not Regional
Another overlooked point is that IPv4 scarcity is a global constraint rather than a regional one.
All five RIRs exhausted their free IPv4 pools years ago. The only sustainable way to obtain additional address space today is through transfers from other IPv4 holders.
From a practical standpoint, organizations expanding network infrastructure are competing for the same limited resource regardless of the registry where the space originally resided. AI infrastructure often multiplies IPv4 demand at the edge, because inference services, API gateways, and distributed compute endpoints require large numbers of externally reachable addresses. That connection between AI and IPv4 scarcity is becoming an increasingly interesting topic within the industry.
Even when organizations deploy IPv6 internally, many customer-facing services, APIs, and distributed inference endpoints must still maintain IPv4 reachability for compatibility with the existing internet.
As a result, the global transfer market increasingly treats IPv4 space as a unified asset class rather than a set of regional silos.
Registry Origin vs Operational Reality
An IPv4 block’s originating registry does not define its operational characteristics once it has been transferred to another RIR. When LACNIC space is transferred into ARIN, RIPE, or APNIC under the respective transfer policies, it becomes fully integrated into the recipient registry’s ecosystem. From that point forward, the address space is administered, governed, and recorded by the new RIR.
Routing behavior, WHOIS records, and registry governance all reflect the new registry. In practical operational terms, the inter-regionally transferred address block functions no differently from any other allocation within that registry.
This means that once LACNIC-origin space is transferred into another region, its historical association with LACNIC has no meaningful technical impact on network operations.
Why the Perception Exists
The perception likely stems from a combination of historical and psychological factors rather than real network engineering considerations.
The IPv4 transfer market initially developed around ARIN and RIPE space, as these regions historically had the largest pools of allocations and the earliest policy frameworks supporting transfers. As a result, many IPv4 address brokers built their initial inventories and client relationship networks around space from the two registrars, and then eventually APNIC space.
As a result, many buyers simply became accustomed to seeing ARIN, RIPE, or APNIC space in the secondary market. Anything outside that familiar pattern can sometimes be viewed as unusual, even when there is no underlying technical difference.
Prior to mid-2020, LACNIC had no policy framework enabling transfers to or from other regions.
Cross-registry transfers involving LACNIC can take slightly longer to complete, as parts of their approval process have traditionally relied on signed documentation and manual verification steps. For organizations acquiring a scarce asset, the modest increase in processing time from the sending registrar is rarely a material concern.
Another contributing factor is the way address histories are sometimes interpreted. Buyers occasionally assume that registry origin correlates with address reputation or historical use patterns (prior operational use of the block), when in fact those characteristics vary dramatically from block to block, regardless of registry.
The Clean Address Advantage
Ironically, LACNIC-origin IPv4 space can often have characteristics that are highly desirable.
Compared to heavily utilized address ranges in North America and parts of Europe or Asia, many LACNIC allocations have historically experienced lower levels of saturation and reuse. This can mean that LACNIC address blocks have seen fewer cycles of reassignment, fewer legacy hosting operations, and less historical abuse.
For organizations deploying infrastructure that depends on IP reputation, this can be an advantage.
Clean address history is particularly valuable for:
- email infrastructure and enhanced deliverability
- VPN and privacy services
- fintech platforms and payment networks
- hosting and cloud environments
- large-scale enterprise application deployments
In these environments, a block with minimal historical abuse can reduce blacklisting risks, improve email deliverability, and simplify long-term operational management.
Reputation Is Determined by History, Not Registry
Ultimately, the value and usability of an IPv4 block depend on its historical behavior rather than its registry of origin.
Two /20 blocks from the same registry can have completely different reputational profiles depending on how they were used over time. One may have extensive spam or abuse listings while another may be effectively pristine.
This is why experienced buyers focus on due diligence rather than registry labels; these typically involve several practical checks:
- historical abuse records
• routing history and stability
• previous usage patterns
• blacklist presence
• registry transfer eligibility
These factors provide meaningful insight into the operational quality of a block. Registry origin alone rarely provides useful information about how the address space will perform in production networks.
A Market Perception That Is Gradually Changing
As the IPv4 transfer market has matured, cross-registry transfers are now very common. As a result, the distinction between registry origins is becoming increasingly less relevant.
Operators increasingly recognize that once address space is transferred and integrated into a new registry environment, it behaves exactly like any other allocation within that ecosystem.
This point is also illustrated by a well-known case in the industry where a single Africa-based organization received approximately 6.2 million IPv4 addresses from African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) between 2013 and 2016 and subsequently leased a large portion of that address space to companies operating around the world. Although all the addresses are subject to AFRINIC policies and regulations, public routing data indicates that most of them are now used outside of Africa, including by a major global cloud platform. This example highlights how IPv4 demand is now fundamentally global in nature.
That said, from a risk and governance perspective, acquiring transferable address space through standard RIR transfer mechanisms, such as LACNIC transfers into ARIN, RIPE, or APNIC, generally provides clearer long-term operational certainty than leasing address space originating from regions with more ambiguous regulatory environments.
Earlier, I wrote about the internal transfer of approximately 7.11 million IPv4 addresses from V.tal (LACNIC) to Globenet Cabos Submarinos America (ARIN). Since that transfer was completed, roughly 3 million of those addresses have subsequently been sold to third parties within a relatively short period of time. While many factors influence purchasing decisions, the speed with which these addresses were absorbed by the market provides further evidence that former LACNIC address space is not viewed by buyers as inherently less desirable than space originating from other regions.
For organizations building large-scale internet infrastructure, the most valuable IPv4 resource is not defined by where it came from, but by how cleanly it can support the next generation of global network and application infrastructure.