[arin-ppml] Proposal to ban Leasing of IP Addresses in the ARIN region

[Michael Abejuela]

This policy proposal is outside the scope of the ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual and similarly, discussions regarding pricing structures that members of the community must charge for their services are wholly outside the scope of the PPML. Further discussion of this policy must cease, and it is advisable for participants on PPML to be cautious when commenting on any proposals that may be seen as an unreasonable restraint of trade, specifically including restrictions on pricing or pricing models via contract, combination, or conspiracy.  ARIN policy does not impose any such restrictions on trade or pricing; and any attempt to propose or discuss such policies are prohibited.

Please focus all proposals and discussions on policies that meet the Internet number resource policy principles of 1) enabling fair and impartial number resource administration, 2) technically sound (providing for uniqueness and usability of number resources), and 3) supported by the community. Discussions about pricing and/or pricing models for members of the community are not appropriate for this mailing list and outside the scope of the Policy Development Process (PDP).

--
Michael R. Abejuela
General Counsel
ARIN


From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> on behalf of Isaiah Olson <isaiah at olson-network.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 9:14 AM
To: 'ARIN-PPML List' <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: [arin-ppml] Proposal to ban Leasing of IP Addresses in the ARIN region


Hi Owen,

I do not support what you propose either. I don't disagree with your past assertions that "leasing" may be an appropriate term to describe the normal practice of LIRs delegating addresses in association with connectivity services. Given the fact that we're all using the term leasing to refer to slightly different things, let me clarify my earlier statements. First, let me give an unambiguous definition from a recent ACM paper:
A leasing contract can restrict address usage and may include hosting or network connectivity agreements, or both. For hosters, the leased address space is usually still located in their own AS. In this paper we are considering two types of IP leasing models. In the first model an IP broker only leases IP address space to a customer, while in the second the IP leasing is bundled with another service contract, e.g., infrastructure hosting.

I would support a well crafted policy proposal to disallow transactions of the type they refer to as the "first model", i.e. leasing addresses without any associated connectivity agreement, so long as it achieves that goal without affecting the practices described in the second model. I don't see surcharging or separate line items for address space in association with connectivity services as an issue, or consider it to be the same thing as leasing space off-network, which is an unrelated business practice. In the absence of a policy proposal that can tackle the former model without affecting the normal operation of LIRs, I prefer to keep the current policy, which allows the practice of off-network leasing, but does not allow leased addresses to be used as justification for additional space.

Thanks,
Isaiah

This may be considered out of scope for policy and/or might require a combination of policy and amendment to the RSA, but here goes:



Template: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-3.0



  1.      Policy Proposal Name: Ban IP Number Resource Leasing in the ARIN Region

  2.      Proposal Originator

         a.      name: Owen DeLong

         b.      email: owen at delong.com<https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>

         c.      telephone: 408-890-7992

         d.      organization: DeLong Consulting

  3.      Date:   22 September, 2021

  4.      Problem Statement:

         There is substantial discussion on PPML in opposition to Mike Burn’s proposal to allow leasing. This proposal is offered as an antonym for the consideration of those opposed to Mike’s proposal.

         This proposal would, effectively prevent all LIRs from engaging in leasing transactions or (sur)charging on the basis of the number of IP number resources issued.

  5.      Policy statement:

                                Add to the appropriate places in each of sections 4, 5, and 6 a new section containing the following text:

No signatory to any ARIN RSA is permitted by policy to engage in a recurring charge for addresses or a differentiated service charge based on the number if addresses issued to a customer. Addresses must be provided strictly as part of a contract for connectivity services and the number of addresses provided shall not, in any way, affect the cost of those connectivity services.

  6.      Comments:

         a.      Timetable for implementation: Immediate

         b.      Anything else



END OF TEMPLATE

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210922/2cf71b33/attachment.htm>