<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Sep 21, 2021, at 23:49 , Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz" class="">noah@neo.co.tz</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div class=""><br class=""><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, 02:56 Mike Burns, <<a href="mailto:mike@iptrading.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">mike@iptrading.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><u class=""></u><div class=""><div style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt" class=""><div class="">Hi Noah,<br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Will you concede that lessors and lessees are willingly engaging in leasing today?<br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">There is no such thing. You are calling end-user assignments and suballocations that result from LIR/ISP connectivity services... leasing. No connectivity no IP address, no need.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Like it or not, there really is such a thing and it really is happening today all over the internet. It’s 100% legitimate in the RIPE region.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>You cannot legitimately claim there is no such thing. It’s even 100% legitimate in the ARIN region for space you already have. It just doesn’t count as utilization for purposes</div><div>of acquiring more space in the ARIN region.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt" class=""><div class=""></div><div class="">That will cut out the examples and cut to the chase.<br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There is no need to look for hidden motivations.<br class=""></div><div class="">Here are the motivations as I see them, with direct experience in these matters from many levels.<br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Address holders no longer fear IPv6 apocalypse in the near- to mid-term.<br class=""></div><div class="">Addresses are skyrocketing in value, now over $60 at times.<br class=""></div><div class="">Your generous LIR on the list would be committing over $250,000 in value to this WISP if they designate a /20 for their use.</div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">So a WISP would happily pay $250,000 for a lease? Rather than obtain connectivity service from an LIR and get a /24 or /23 based on real need.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>As a general rule, you would not pay $250,000 per month to lease an object you could purchase for $250,000.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>OTOH, the provider doesn’t want to tie up a $250,000 asset with no ROI for those months, either.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>It very likely, however, makes sense for the WISP to pay $5,500/month to lease the space so that he doesn’t have to commit to a $0.25M purchase without</div><div>knowing it will bring some ROI and it’s likely profitable for the LIR as well, since they’ll collect $5,500 for each month that their $0.25M asset is tied up.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>That’s how leasing generally works whether it’s routers, cars, homes, etc.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class="">I am struggling to see how small WISP would find leasing more strategic yet they would end up paying more to cover also the cost of middlemen.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Hopefully this presents a better clarity for you. They pay slightly more per month than if they amortized the purchase across a 4 year financing, but they</div><div>can return the addresses in fewer than 4 years and pay considerably less if the business opportunity doesn’t pan out.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt" class=""><div class="">Some small ISPs and end-users can't get addresses from their upstream LIRs and need to get them on the market.<br class=""></div><div class="">The price is shocking and sometimes just not affordable, or if affordable, would require reduced spending elsewhere in the project.<br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">This market you talk off, where is it and who are the LIR with so much Idle addresses to cash out?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>There are a multitude of organizations that are not ready to part with their addresses permanently (possible future need, desire to maximize ROI, or other reasons), but</div><div>are interested in monetizing them through a temporary lending process. Most ISPs do this today.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt" class=""><div class=""></div><div class="">So they choose to lease, and address holders are happy to monetize their holdings while they appreciate in value.<br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">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?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>They are holding addresses that they received for some previously justified need. It is not clear that there is anything artificial in play.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>So modulo the unwarranted assumptions you baked into your statements above, yes, you are sort of on the right track.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>I will point out that any organization which is transferring addresses in a sale is in the same exact boat, so it’s not clear why you think it is worse for them to put the addresses to good use through leasing than to sell them outright.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class="">So that the purpose for which those LIR obtained the addresses in the first place? </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>It’s unclear what your question is here. It looks like half a statement and no interrogatory.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class="">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.?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>The addresses wouldn’t still be under ARIN management, they’d be in the hands of some other organization. The ARIN free pool is empty. It would be empty no matter what kind of bizarre policy was enacted prior to it being empty short of making sure that organizations that need addresses could not obtain them (which is exactly what the current policies in AFRINIC are set up to do).</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class="">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.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Because it has a monetary value, ARIN won’t reclaim it (and has promised not to in its RSA), and there’s no incentive for them to do so.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt" class=""><div class="">There is nothing mysterious about any of it.<br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">There is alot of mystery and bad faith contrary to what the internet community expected from address management for best interest of everyone.</div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Not really. You are assuming bad faith where none is evident. You are making a lot of value judgements and attributing a lot of motivations to people with no evidence to support them.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Owen</div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>