[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Remove Circuit Requirement
hostmaster at uneedus.com
hostmaster at uneedus.com
Wed Sep 22 04:10:56 EDT 2021
Using leases as justification for more addresses I believe is wrong.
I think that ARIN worked better when there was a free pool, and people
received from ARIN what they needed, and returned those addresses that
were no longer needed. That day has long passed in the IPv4 world.
Notice how much difference there is in the operation of ARIN in respect to
IPv4 resources, and compare that to 32 bit ASN's and IPv6.
This difference in behavior is caused by the shortage of IPv4 addresses.
As to the remaining items, ARIN operates much differently, because both
ASN's and IPv6 have a free pool. Because of this, there is no gaming the
system, and these pools work more like the original way that ARIN began.
Initial IPv6 amounts are generally large enough that most do not come
back for more, meaning less work for ARIN staff.
Note the absence of transfer options for IPv6, or any pressure to allow
sales and leasing of IPv6 addresses. Because IPv6 addresses can be
obtained at any justified level directly from ARIN, no one is going to try
to promote sales and leasing of IPv6 addresses, because there is a natural
price cap, since they always can be obtained directly from ARIN.
This, and the lack of IPv6 LRSA's means that we operate in IPv6 in a more
natural mode, where addresses are obtained as needed, and returned when
they are not. This is part of the reason that I like IPv6, because it is
so much easier to deal with. It is much the same mode that existed in
IPv4 before exhaust. It reminds me of a simpler time, where there is not
that Dog Eat Dog mode that seems to dominate IPv4 currently.
As predicted, we will likely drag this at least another 20 years before
IPv6 becomes the majority protocol, and the IPv4 market starts to
collapse. I recently learned that NCP and TCP were also run in a dual
stack format before NCP was turned off on 1/1/1983. I was originally
misinformed that it was a hot cut. The part we missed is that a shutoff
date for IPv4 should have been set long before IPv4 ran out, but this was
never done, and I doubt that it would ever happen now.
IPv6 and ASN's seem to take care of themselves. Most entities once they
receive their initial block of IPv6 and an ASN process very few
transactions related to those items. Very few have come back for a second
byte of the IPv6 apple.
On the other hand, I believe that a large amount of the ARIN expenses and
staff time revolve around IPv4 and transfers. While the transfer fees
help with these expenses, I do not think that these fees cover all such
costs. When we get to the point that IPv6 is the main protocol, I believe
that ARIN's Costs will fall, since the staff spends so much time currently
with things relating to IPv4.
Paradise On Line Inc.
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> On 22/09/2021 03:49, Noah wrote:
> So they choose to lease, and address holders are happy to monetize their holdings while they appreciate in value.
> By address holders you mean LIR. So what you are saying is that some LIR out there who requested for IPv4 based on need from ARIN, are holding the addresses
> which they no longer need artificially? So that they can lease to small WISP?
> So that the purpose for which those LIR obtained the addresses in the first place?
> Suppose the addresses those LIR are holding with no intension to use them, were still under ARIN management, dont you think the new small WISP would have better
> off being served by ARIN as new needs arise.?
> If LIR dont pay ARIN lots of money, why not return the idle addresses to ARIN so that those with genuine need can be served.
> That's the whole point I have been saying about the absurd IP leasing is.
> It is quiet logical these organizations to be better off served by ARIN than a third party who probably doesn't even have justification to hold those addresses
> anymore. So either transfer them to someone who justify them or return them to ARIN so it can fullfil its mission by assigning directly to this organization.
> 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.
More information about the ARIN-PPML