[arin-ppml] Policy Experience Report Working Group Leasing Question
fhfrediani at gmail.com
Mon May 8 18:26:30 EDT 2023
It is that very difficult to differentiate a scenario where a final
customer receives a block allocation in order to have their Internet
service working with that connectivity provider. That has never been a
Another thing which many here are targeting about IP leasing in the
sense of renting, speculation made by those who don't build or offer any
Internet infrastructure and services. In other words someone holding IP
space and not using it to build any Internet infrastructure and services.
On 08/05/2023 19:16, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:05 PM Noah<noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 May 2023, 22:19 William Herrin,<bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> We are all aware that ISPs are generally LIRs and as such,
>> their downstream endusers/customers often time get assigned
>> small blocks like /24 based on need ontop of the connectivity
>> services they are provided by the ISP.
> Some also end up being the source of the IP addresses but only a small
> source of the transit. Think: T1 and /24 from ISP A, gigabit ethernet
> from ISP B. I haven't counted but there are at least hundreds of
> these. I don't know how we write policy that disqualifies pretextual
> leasing (like Owen was talking about) without also disqualifying these
> longstanding and reasonable uses.
>>> Historically, a few ISPs even allowed some customers to keep their IP
>>> addresses when they left.
>> Very few __and those IPs were transferred to those customers__ who then became resource members through the RIR process.
> That is not accurate.
>> Unused address ought to be returned back to the RIR inventory for further redistribution.
> A quarter of a century of RIR experience suggests that mostly doesn't
> happen. Hence the existence of a transfer market. Which does seem to
> Bill Herrin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML