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

[Mike Burns]

Hi Martin,

 

Are we regulating for price now?

Your numbers seem accurate to me.

 

Regards,
Mike

 

 

 

 

From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 1:53 PM
To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>
Cc: Jim <mysidia at gmail.com>; John Santos <john at egh.com>; ARIN-PPML List <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-18: LIR/ISP Re-Assignment to Non-Connected Networks

 

 

 

On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 1:37 PM Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com> > wrote:

Jim wrote:
I am opposed to proposal that ARIN should in general be facilitating
entities
being able to obtain from ARIN   permanent allocations made to
support  temporary use for non-connected networks.    It sounds like
creating an inviting environment for potential spammers and fraud, and
LIRs/ISPs should not be involved in this.


Hi Jim,

More hand-waving about spam and fraud that doesn't exist and ignoring the
obvious need that does exist. A market has arisen to meet the need, that
proves the need exists. A google search confirms this for everybody.  But
the environment you exists and has not generated spam and fraud.

This is why I point to RIPE. They have what you refer to as "policy
facilitating enties being able to obtain from (the RIR) permanent
allocations made to support temporary use for non-connected networks." You
say this will create an inviting environment for more of the spooky
consequences I have heard about for almost 10 years now. Spooky consequences
absent from RIPE. Or can you find them there?

 

I'm opposed to it, but for different reasons. I worry about the cash flows building against leased numbers and creating a situation where it increases costs on the transfer market by competition for space. I'm seeing /24's at $90 MRC. That's roughly $4 per address per year leased vs. $21 on the transfer market. I agree, probably not abused any more than anything else. For me, it sends the wrong message transition wise.


Can it be more clear?  RIPE has had NO NEEDS TEST FOR YEARS.  We have
performed the experiment, why ignore the results?
If I want to become a Lessor, yet another reason to incorporate in Europe, I
guess. There is no restriction in RIPE in the purchasing of addresses for
the purpose of leasing them out, nor for the leasing part. 
A recipe for registry-shopping and address-flight.

 

I mostly agree with you. RIPE is a different region though and has different allocation patterns and concerns about their registry inventory. RIPE policy makers seem to feel that exhausting and a liberal market is the fastest way to transition.At least that's how I read it sometimes. I'm not going to judge if they are right or wrong. ARIN network operators tend to want to be more independent and there are many examples where the world goes left and NA goes right, infrastructure wise. Just the nature of the beast. I don't think everyone understands that there actually is common policy (via the ASO process and IANA) and then globally coordinated, more like a treaty. Its just not everything. But there is more in common than not.

 

Best,

 

-M<

 

 

 


Regards,
Mike




_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net> ).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net>  if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20191001/da0a3131/attachment.htm>