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

Jim mysidia at gmail.com
Sun Nov 3 16:22:09 EST 2019


On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 5:17 PM Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>
[snip]> actually want ARIN to try to enforce. IMO the current policy
requiring only a VPN
> tunnel or unused switch port as a fig leaf to allow address leasing is untenable [...]

Perhaps IP leasing should be allowed,  But  all consideration must be
declared to ARIN,  and 50% of all revenue from any lease or transfer with
consideration must be paid to ARIN specifically  to be dedicated to funding
enforcement and fraud prevention efforts.  ^_`

These "Fig leafs" for address leasing sound like basically fraud.
If there's a fig leaf,  that's used to  conceal a lack of valid justification
under existent policy with intended purpose as merely a device to
circumvent the policy language;  its a form of fraud.

At least in theory;
that ought to be rejected in most cases --  just b/c there might be some
allowable applications for IP space that involve VPNs, Etc;  does not
mean that arbitrarily creating a VPN, etc,  for IP address association
is not fraud.

At the end of the day,  any applicant can design some technical
concoction which artificially requires IP addresses.

I believe ARIN staff ought to be able to investigate applications for IP
space and  consider based on surrounding facts and circumstances --

Whether there is adequate proof that something looking like a
VPN or Switch port  "Fig leaf"  has  a well-established reason for
existing with a purpose of providing primary or at least equal network
connectivity to other methods of connectivity commercially available to
that service.


> -Scott
--
-JH


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list