[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-18: LIR/ISP Re-Assignment to Non-Connected Networks - Clarifying Language

[Martin Hannigan]

Bootp, AAA, dhcp? MSO, MNO? Been happening for a long time already.
Admittedly, this is a twist. However, its a cost saving measure for those
who need it and have a real use. Cost wise, its effective. While I agree
the business model may be less desired to some, the outcome is legit.

The question could be about accurate tallying of utilization.

Best,

-M<



On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 17:58 scott <scott at solarnetone.org> wrote:

> IMHO, we should do everything we can to prevent "internet landlords."
> Further, I do not see a legitimage use case problem that is solved by
> allowing leasing that is not solved by upstream provided address space, or
> barring that, 4.10 of the NRPM.  If we want to enable spammers, attack
> networks, and other bad actors, then leasing is for sure a great solution
> for them, and the "internet slumlords" that would provide their resources.
>
> Scott
>
> On Sun, 3 Nov 2019, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 10:30 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > [ clip ]
> >
> >       However, what I do not want to see is a situation where we
> >       permit the desire to lease space as a justification for
> >       obtaining space through the transfer market (or
> > any other mechanism). If you want to leas space you already have,
> > then fine. But the desire to lease space in and of itself should not
> > qualify as “utilization” or
> > “need” in evaluation of any form of resource request.
> >
> >
> >
> > Needs a little more clarify for me. Either the lessor or lessee has a
> right
> > to use the numbers as justification? The lessee may be the logical party,
> > but seems less likely to be in the transfer market. However, if they are
> > leasing numbers they may have legitimate need. On the other hand, if a
> > lessor has a ratio like an ISP or other provider using numbers in an
> > aggregated manner _and_ the lessee can't use the lease as justification
> for
> > transfers, that would seem to be inline with current practice. I do think
> > legitimately "in use" addresses should be eligible for "need" credit.
> Isn't
> > the idea that "access" is being facilitated by providing the numbers? You
> > can use RFC 1918 address space as a justification for need and the
> numbers
> > are technically "not connected". I'm thinking source nor business model
> > should matter, but that we're careful who is getting credit for them.
> Just
> > saying that made me wonder if this is even worth addressing.
> >
> > Feels like it is more sensible to allow the both to demonstrate use as a
> > justification and let ARIN process sort it out.
> >
> > $0.02
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > -M<
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20191103/00225cf4/attachment.htm>