[arin-ppml] "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers
jbates at brightok.net
Thu Feb 10 21:19:28 EST 2011
On 2/10/2011 2:41 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> The only difference is that the more liberal, direct form of leasing allows buyers of address capacity to bid without going through ARIN's bureaucracy. I think this benefit both the transacting parties and ARIN. I don't think "demonstrated need" is an issue because I don't think many buyers are going to pay some ISP substantial monthly sums for a service that they don't "need". I simply think we can let the market do this for us.
It should be noted that ARIN's policy is around transfers. Leasing is a
different matter. It should also be noted, that to some degree, all
suballocations issued from an ISP downstream is a form of lease.
Sometimes there is direct monetary exchange, while often it is
conditional lease based on connectivity.
However, it is not unheard of for someone to leave an ISP and the ISP
allow them to take the address space for a fee. Nor is it unheard of for
people to operate as a pure LIR (not an ISP), which while referenced by
ARIN is often not assigned any value outside of the term ISP. However,
there are LIRs, and they often due charge for the use of address space
they are assigned.
More information about the ARIN-PPML