[arin-ppml] Change of Use and ARIN (was: Re: AFRINIC And The Stability Of The Internet Number Registry System)

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at gmail.com
Thu Sep 2 23:56:06 EDT 2021


Surely people benefiting from IP leasing will keep trying to make it 
'normal', acceptable and part of day by day as if these middleman were 
facilitating something for the good of the internet while it is the 
opposite.
This practice serves exclusively to the financial benefit of those who 
lease (but are not building any Internet Infrastructure) and of course 
to the middleman not the lessee.

How can it be beneficial to lessee that has to pay more they would have 
to spend if those very same resources were recovered by the RIR and 
re-distributed directly to that same organization ?

It doesn't matter much how the scenario changed in the past and recent 
years. There are principles and fairness to be observed and they should 
not change in order to adjust the interest of these few ones who 
speculate a resource that doesn't belong to them and wasn't justified 
for that propose. It is just easier the RIR to recover them and do the 
right thing, for harder and stressful it can be it is the right thing to 
be done.

I don't mean to sound rude to those who disagree with me, but I really 
hope RIRs in general revoke as much as possible addresses clearly being 
used for leasing where the resource holder only speculates them, doesn't 
build any Internet infrastructure and where in many cases don't even 
exist connectivity between the current resource holder and the lessee 
and re-allocate them to those who truly justify. This has nothing to do 
with interfere in the business of that resource holder.

Often those supporting this misuse of IP resources try to paint a 
picture that those resources are organization's property and the RIR 
should be unable to do anything about that. Not being a irrevocable 
properly organizations own explanations and clarity about how they use 
it according to the what is in the best interest of all those who 
developed and agreed the current rules in place and the organization who 
has the duty to inspect that. Regardless the commercial model of an 
organization it must adhere to the current rules and contract they 
previously signed, not the other way round.

Also the understanding that a LIR leases IP addresses is quiet wrong. If 
they are build Internet infrastructure, provide connectivity and charge 
administrative fees for the addresses they allocate to that customer 
there is nothing wrong with it.
I personally can understand the permanent Transfer of resources and that 
has been a more natural and fair movement and why community agreed on 
that on most RIRs, but despite some beautiful picture painted IP leasing 
brings no good to lessee and to the Internet if things can be done in 
the proper way.

Regards
Fernando

On 02/09/2021 17:39, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> In message <058401d7a013$7797d160$66c77420$@iptrading.com>,
> "Mike Burns" <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
>
>> We tried the method you've espoused below for thirty years and
>> the result were a huge amount of wasted address space. Once the market
>> was adopted, many of those addresses found a useful place in the routing
>> table.
> Well, it's sort of a Catch-22.  Mike, you're absolutely right that once
> there was a free market, a lot of stuff came off the shelves and started
> to be used productively.  But can any of us say with confidence that once
> there was a free market, a lot of this commodity (IPv4) that was sitting
> on shelves didn't just stay there -because- of the open and free market...
> because the "owners" of those blocks effectively became speculators, just
> waiting arond for the scarcity to become more acute, and for the price to
> go up?
>
> (I confess that I never in my life took an economics class, but it seems
> to me that the entire field is chock full of head-scratching conundrums
> like this... situation where you are damned if you do and damned if you
> don't.)
>
>> The free pool era is dying, let's put a fork in it as quickly as
>> possible We've seen the corruption engendered by the bait of the
>> free pool in multiple registries now, including our own.
> Just curious Mike... Does this opinion on your part extend also to IPv6?
>
>> Your old-fashioned method of address distribution would get some
>> addresses to those in need, I will concede that. However, so will
>> leasing addresses, with that demonstration of need being the lease
>> payment. Will  you concede that those who pay to lease addresses need
>> them?
> Even if nobody else does, I certainly will.  But of course that's not the
> only issue.
>
> The current Cloud Innovation v. AFRINIC thing is in some ways confusing as
> hell because it has brought to a head -multiple- long-standing issues that
> have then gotten all tangled up with one another, making it difficult for
> anybody to tease apart the various separate issues.
>
> One of these is what might be called "equity", i.e. the social desire to
> help Africa, a continent and a people who have been on the receiving end
> of so much exploitation and malevolent evil, over the centuries, at the
> hands of others.
>
> Another issue is the right and proper role of RIRs.
>
> Last but not leas (and perhaps the most troubling and most difficult to
> crack open in a way that does not merely reveal our individual biases) is
> the question of the proper role of what I will just call "speculators"
> within any free market.
>
> Contrary to what some might say, I think that when it comes to IPv4 addresses
> at least, it most certainly -is- possible to distinguish "speculators" from
> actual and legitimate end users and/or legitimate brokers & middlemen such
> as yourself.  As I understand it, the current system requires people to
> document their equipment purchases.  No equipment purchases?  You're almost
> certainly just a speculator.
>
> So then the question becomes two-fold:  (1) Do we want speculators in this
> marketplace? and (2) Is there any actually feasible way to keep them out
> of the "free" market even if the collective "we" firmly decided that we
> wanted to do so?
>
> I personally don't have answers to any of these questions.  I would only
> offer up the observation that I am aware of at least a few speculators at
> this moment in time, and it would be an understatement for me to say that
> their actions seem to me to be both glaringly untoward and also unhelpful.
> But if you ask me IN GENERAL whether "speculators" are a necessary and even
> useful component of a free market, I cannot say they are not.  And it seems
> I may not be alone in leaving open this possibility:
>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/07/09/the-theranos-implosion-and-robert-shiller-on-short-selling-and-complete-markets/
>
> Regards,
> rfg
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (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 if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210903/ad8c9db3/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list