[arin-ppml] IP leasing policy

[William Herrin]

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 6:48 PM Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>
wrote:
> The scenario that matters to us is when a ASN leases its own IP space
> to be announced by another given this last one has the ability and should
> get them directly from the RIR. I can't see any scenario that justifies
that
> other than go around the system and pass in front of others paying for it.

Hi Fernando,

Perhaps you are unaware but there was a time in ARIN's history where ISPs
were described in the policy manual as LIRs, Local Internet Registries,
precisely because they were expected to handle allocations to small
end-users who wanted to participate in BGP but did not qualify for an ARIN
minimum assignment. It was hoped at the time that would help improve
aggregation and routing but the technology didn't pan out that way. The
terminology has been retired (it confused people) but the behavior
underpinning the terminology remains entirely legitimate.

> An ASN received IP space to assign to other scenarios different from
> this, not to lease to someone other ASN announce pretending the first one
is a RIR.

For better or for worse that is factually incorrect.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William Herrin
bill at herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190529/65493eea/attachment.htm>