[arin-ppml] Change of Use and ARIN (was: Re: AFRINIC And The Stability Of The Internet Number Registry System)
h.lu at anytimechinese.com
Fri Sep 3 00:32:46 EDT 2021
Taking out the market and middle man, have one central body distribute all
resources and reclaim them when not needed.
Wasn’t humanity spend entire 20 century with millions life dead to proof it
<scott at solarnetone.org>于2021年9月3日 周五下午12:03写道：
> Agreed. The middleman with no infrastructure business model is by
> it's very nature parasitic.
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> > 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
> > (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
> > 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
> > 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
> > It is just easier the RIR to recover them and do the right thing, for
> > 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
> > RIRs in general revoke as much as possible addresses clearly being used
> > 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
> > 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
> > that. Regardless the commercial model of an organization it must adhere
> > 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
> > is nothing wrong with it.
> > I personally can understand the permanent Transfer of resources and that
> > 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
> > good to lessee and to the Internet if things can be done in the proper
> > Regards
> > Fernando
> > On 02/09/2021 17:39, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> > In message <email@example.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
> > 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
> > hell because it has brought to a head -multiple- long-standing issues
> > 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
> > s
> > at least, it most certainly -is- possible to distinguish "speculators"
> > actual and legitimate end users and/or legitimate brokers & middlemen
> > as yourself. As I understand it, the current system requires people to
> > document their equipment purchases. No equipment purchases? You're
> > certainly just a speculator.
> > So then the question becomes two-fold: (1) Do we want speculators in
> > 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
> > But if you ask me IN GENERAL whether "speculators" are a necessary and
> > useful component of a free market, I cannot say they are not. And it
> > I may not be alone in leaving open this possibility:
> > nd-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.
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML