[arin-ppml] "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers (was: Re: And so it ends... )
I would be very reluctant to make any rules around this, at least until we
have real-world examples of leasing behavior causing significant issues that
can't be dealt with through normal processes. As long as number resources
are being put to productive use, and the whois database is kept up-to-date
with regards to who's actually using the space, I'd be hesitant to try to
micromanage the arrangements between consenting parties...
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:49 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> Note: moved this to the ARIN PPML list from NANOG.
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:54 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> > For the ARIN region, it would be nice to know how you'd like ARIN perform
> > in the presence of such activity ("leasing" IP addresses by ISP not
> > connectivity). It's possible that such is perfectly reasonable and to
> > be ignored, it's also possible that such should be considered a
> > transfer and the resources reclaimed. At the end of the day, the policy
> > set by this community, and clarity over ambiguity is very helpful.
> 1. Whatever arrangements work out in the market are fine, including
> Pros: Noninterference. Let's the market do its thing.
> Cons: Contrary to the needs basis we've adhered to for the last 20
> years. The the end user needs the addresses enough to pay the price
> and the lessor can spare them then obviously the end user needs those
> addresses, not the lessor.
> 2. Address leasing is not allowed. Must get your addresses from a
> primary or at least major bandwidth provider. Addresses found to be
> leased or provided in with a paper-tiger transit arrangement are
> subject to reclamation by ARIN.
> Pros: Keeps the market more or less honest. IP addresses are a public
> resource; they don't belong to you. As incentive to put your uneeded
> addresses back into the supply, you're allowed to sell them at
> market... but you don't get to be like the landlords of Europe that
> prompted the 19th century emigration to the Americas, refusing to sell
> to the folks living on the land at any price.
> Cons: Unenforceable.
> 3. Any multihomed registrant using an ARIN AS number and SWIPed for at
> least one year with a /24 or larger is entitled to convert the
> registration to an ARIN direct assignment upon filing the proper
> paperwork. Refusing SWIP or assigning addresses out of region is
> grounds for reclamation.
> Pros: Lets the original registrant earn his money but guarantees that
> address assignments will move towards the multihomed end users.
> Cons: Fragmentation. No way to ever move growing entities from
> individual /24's to aggregable address blocks. Have to hope the IPv6
> migration solves this problem before it can get serious. Also, it
> implies a change in ISP's internal routing management. These new
> registrations are functionally different from older direct
> registrations - they'll likely still be subject to some ISP's covering
> route, even though they're no longer used with that ISP.
> Any other sensible ways to slice and dice the issue?
> Bill Herrin
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...