<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
span.tlid-translation
{mso-style-name:tlid-translation;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>Hi Fernando,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>If you search “ipv4 leasing” you will find this practice widespread globally.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>We have transitioned from the original distribution mechanism of the RIRs before exhaust, to a new mechanism.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>The new mechanism is the IPv4 market.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>You are free to ignore it or tilt against it, but is the current state of affairs. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>In this state, without a specific policy regarding leasing, leasing happens in a way that is sometimes working against the RIR’s mandate regarding accurate registration. This has effects for abuse complaints and law enforcement activities, so there are probably varied constituents among the ARIN community who might see some value in a lease policy. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>In the context of the global anti-hijacking proposals which have largely been deemed out-of-scope, a lease policy has some results that are sympathetic to the goals of those proposals.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'>Regards,<br>Mike<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='color:windowtext'> ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Fernando Frediani<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, May 30, 2019 12:46 PM<br><b>To:</b> arin-ppml <arin-ppml@arin.net><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [arin-ppml] IP leasing policy<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p>+1<o:p></o:p></p><p>What I am seeing by some positions are attempts to turn a fraudulent act into "something normal" because "market demands" and a total diversion of what IP space should ever be making look normal a company who received IP space from the RIR and **does not use it** rent it to someone else a ownership of a property they do not have.<br>And some of these attempts come from people who apparently have high financial interests in this <span class=tlid-translation><span lang=EN>deviation from purpose of IP space</span></span>, but try to make it look like it is "for the good of the Internet".<o:p></o:p></p><p>Trying to resume it in different terms it looks like in the recent IPv4 exhaustion times some individuals wish to go for "all-or-nothing" and make up rules to allow them to have easy access to IPv4 space via a shortcut and in front of many other people, bypassing the RIR if possible regardless how.<br>It has always been clear to many professionals what IP allocation by an ISP to its customers means, doesn't even need to explain much, it is obvious, but then there are attempts to make leasing a property they don't own something acceptable and normal.<o:p></o:p></p><p>We are here discussing rules for a waiting list to make it something fair and that all can be treated in the same way, but suddenly some see they feel "more equal than others" demanding to have ways to access IP space in a more privileged way than those who are patiently waiting. Strange times !<o:p></o:p></p><p>Shall we focus ?<o:p></o:p></p><p>Fernando<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 30/05/2019 12:25, Jimmy Hess wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:26 PM Scott Leibrand <a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com"><scottleibrand@gmail.com></a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>(New subject line for a new topic.)<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>You just described a lease policy: one where leasing is not allowed. Such a policy would<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>have to exist to be enforced. Right now there is no policy, so leasing is allowed because<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>it's not prohibited.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Actually not. ARIN's Policy does not have to contain a specific<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>prohibition for every form of abuse --- The PDP describes when<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>IP addresses can be allocated, and any intended Usage for IP<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>resources that is not provided by an allocation policy should not<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>get past ARIN's required reviews.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>An organization attempting to misrepresent to ARIN the nature of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>that organization and their business, the need for IP addresses, or<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>the intended use for IP addresses and then after receiving an allocation<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>proceeding to "leasing" IP addresses without services would be fraud.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>"We have no allocations but want a /22 of IP addresses, b/c we intend<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>to open up shop and lease /24s to qualified applicants..." should Not<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>and even pass muster under the current policies and required reviews<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>--- ISPs should in fact be able to show through sufficient connectivity<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>contracts, etc, that they have procured an ISP network; If they cannot, then<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>they are not providing Internet Services, then they are not an ISP.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>ISPs lease space to their customers all the time, bundled with IP connectivity. [...]<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>No.... ISPs provide services related to global IP connectivity and allocate<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>in the amount of IP addresses required for use with that ISP's services;<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>the IPs are not a separate thing that an ISP may offer to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>others who are not current customers of their ISP business.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>Hosting companies do the same. So do VPN providers.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Hosting companies and VPN providers with a working network and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>customers to serve are ISPs; they are in the business of providing<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>internet connectivity to "devices" that are owned or rented by<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>external customers.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre> The challenge with a "no leasing allowed" policy is differentiating ....<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>There is no need to differentiate. A re-assignment or allocation<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>is something that ISPs do to allow a customer use of IP addresses<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>necessary in order to have internet connectivity<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>through that ISP's services OR to allocate a range of IP addresses to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>another ISP who is their customer, After the allocating ISP<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>reviews and verifies their customer's network design and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>IP address justification documentation accordingly.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>You can tell if an organization is an ISP, and not "Leasing" IP addresses,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>because an ISP will only allocate or assign according to justified need<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>respecting ARIN's required Policies and terms<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>regarding customers required to return IP addresses and requiring and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>confirming that downstream customers adhere to required ARIN policies.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>4.2.3.3 and 4.2.3.4 through 7*<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>"The original ISP should allow sufficient time for the renumbering process<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>to be completed before requiring the address space to be returned."<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>"ISPs must require their downstream customers to adhere to the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>following criteria: ...".<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>A "leasing of IPs" is a fraudulent action not authorized by the ARIN RSA which<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>involves a holder of number resources purporting to Rent "ownership"<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>to property they do not have ---<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>that is, a block of IP resources as if those were a piece of property that<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>may be retained or procured by an end user organization for speculative<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>purposes or "in case of possible future need some down the road"<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>without ever actually using or having a valid justification to receive/hold<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>the IP resources.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>--<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>-JH<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>