<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"></head><body ><div style='font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;'>Hi Bill,<br>Thanks for your thoughts.<br>May I ask if you're thinking changes with the understand that all of the addresses being considered are going to be purchased. So really the needs tests are besides the point. The payment of the money is the expression of need.<br><br>I myself would be uneasy at the thought of anybody making a business out of accessing free public IP pools and turning around and renting them.<br><br>But here in Arin where we're holding this discussion, that will not be a problem because of the policy moats around our free pools.<br><br>Conservation is provided by the market. Addresses will flow to their best and highest need.<br><br>Regards,<br>Mike<div id="message"></div><br id="br3"><br id="br3"><br id="br3"><div id="signature"></div><div id="content"><br> ---- On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 19:38:15 -0400 <b> bill@herrin.us </b> wrote ----<br><br><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 6px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 1:13 PM John Curran <<a href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net" target="_blank">jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br>> On Sep 10, 2021, at 12:25 PM, William Herrin <<a href="mailto:bill@herrin.us" target="_blank">bill@herrin.us</a>> wrote:<br>> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 6:06 AM John Curran <<a href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net" target="_blank">jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br>> >> An LIR may not assert that they have a new _technical need_ for more IP address space as a result of signing a leasing contract.<br>> ><br>> > Lol. They have to take the extra step of programming a router. The<br>> > business need is made technical. Such a high, high bar.<br>><br>> Yes, under current policy that is correct.<br>><br>> Do you see that as a problem – and if so, do you have a proposed change to policy text to improve it? That requirement could be eliminated or could be strengthened (as the community feels most appropriate.)<br><br>Hi John,<br><br>I think:<br><br>1. It's disingenuous to argue that a LIR can't lease addresses absent<br>infrastructure when the infrastructure bar they have to meet is<br>negligible.<br><br>2. I've tried and failed to draft policy which sets a higher<br>infrastructure bar without creating an operational problem for real<br>networks.<br><br>3. I'm disturbed by the idea of an "ISP" which just leases addresses.<br>When I examine that feeling more closely, I find that it's not far<br>different than the unease I feel about ISPs providing any addresses<br>for BGP use by customers, with or without network infrastructure.<br>Which in turn is not far different than I feel about ISPs providing<br>large blocks of addresses to any customer rather than asking them to<br>process technical need through ARIN. All three of those situations<br>have conflicts of interest in which the ultimate user of those<br>addresses may not be well served. Fixing these things -would- likely<br>mean operational changes to real networks.<br><br>Regards,<br>Bill Herrin<br><br><br>--<br>William Herrin<br><a href="mailto:bill@herrin.us" target="_blank">bill@herrin.us</a><br><a href="https://bill.herrin.us/" target="_blank">https://bill.herrin.us/</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>ARIN-PPML<br>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" target="_blank">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br><a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br></div></blockquote></div></div><br></body></html>