[arin-ppml] DoD to sell 13 x /8 of its IPv4 Blocks over the next 10 years and need for ARIN-2019-19

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

In message <CAMDXq5NkVraVbFr2=kJERKsDvQKh25MRi6pVg==yaddZLoGPgw at mail.gmail.com>
, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:

>On the operators using DoD space? Too bad. It happened on 23/8 to me and
>many times. I would get a call and was asked to "make an exception" and let
>someone use a subnet or three while they "figured out what to do". Why
>would I or anyone subsidize another network operator? o_0 I received the
>space because I had need. Which means I didn't have the option to turn a
>blind eye. Someone buying address space should be in exactly that position
>or why would/could they buy it? Just as ARIN can't set policy to stop
>squatting, squatters have no rights.

This is a very pretty point, and it will become rather more significant
in the near future, I hope.

Quite a lot of network operators, most of them U.S. based, are, as we
speak, continuing to route provably stolen AFRINIC address space.  At
some point, I and/or others are going to ask them to stop doing that.
They will likely respond that they acted in good faith, and had no way
of knowing that the space they bought was black market IPv4 space,
and that thus, they ought to be allowed to continue routing the space...
and to continue paying rent to the very thieves who stole it.

Although this would at first glance appear to be a rather lame argument,
some will certainly point to the example of the 143.95.0.0/16 block, and
ARIN's response to the facts surrounding it, and then ask the reasonable
question:  Why should African thieves be unfairly disadvantaged relative
to their North American counterparts?  Is this an example of neo-colonialism,
or worse, racism?

Regards,
rfg