<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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{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 lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Brian,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I am not understanding. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Can you be more clear on whose costs are increased by this policy exactly?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Are you saying that because investors could buy more addresses (through demonstrating to ARIN utilization on operating networks) that would raise IPv4 purchase prices? Because they would add demand to the transfer market?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but that is something worthy of discussion I guess.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regards,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Mike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Brian Jones <bjones@vt.edu> <br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 11, 2022 11:58 AM<br><b>To:</b> Mike Burns <mike@iptrading.com>; ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml@arin.net><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Retitled - Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Permit IPv4 Leased Addresses for Purposes of Determining Utilization for Future Allocations<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Mike,<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>IMHO Allowing for rent-seeking behavior increases the cost to those who are actually building and operating networks, therefore further limiting the availability of Internet number resources available for those with less funds to purchase them.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>—<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Brian<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Mar 11, 2022, at 10:09 AM, Mike Burns <<a href="mailto:mike@iptrading.com">mike@iptrading.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>This policy removes the circuit requirement but retains the requirement that blocks be used on operating networks.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>This policy only affects transferred (read “purchased”) addresses and I don’t see how it affects fair and impartial distribution, can you elucidate the manner in which fair and impartial distributions are affected by removing the circuit requirement?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I don’t think the proposal would have been approved for discussion if it opposed fair and impartial distribution.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The original proposal had wording to include the stipulation that Internet numbers were to be used by those building and operating networks.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>