<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Exactly, that's the main point about how absurd the idea of
leasing it, in any form.</p>
<p>I fell that some people sometimes are able to only look at a
particular scenario that he/she being involved once or few times
and believe that is the scenario for everybody else in order to
justify leasing, so basically to resolve their own particular
problem as if that was everybody else's problem and tentatively
force a fundamental change in this system. Does anyone really
believe that most arguments people involved in the leasing
business are intended to do any good for the whole of the
community or simply to promote changes to the rules that benefits
fewer and specifics actors ?<br>
</p>
<p>Allowing leasing as some defend is detrimental to the whole RIR
system and therefore to the whole of the community. IP Leasing
resolves some minor cases but worse situations that at long term
make things more difficult, expensive and less accountable,
therefore less fair to everybody in a well established system.
This is why justifications such as "need to change because there
are already people doing it" or "it is the new reality and we have
to accept" are just beautiful word to try to justify something
that is not intended to build Internet using these shared
resources. We can never call it another name - shared resources.<br>
</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 17/03/2022 20:28, Holden Karau
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJLcJd_0kCj=eVL5KXUjS21Fj72wHv4V5__WPSr3-qZznD5GDQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Wait so some company could come to ARIN and ask for
a block of IP addresses using leasing as the justification and
then turn around and lease them.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What value is the leasing company providing? It seems like
a solid way to get a bunch of LLCs formed to acquire IP
addresses from the waiting list and then make money for doing
~nothing.</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 4:18
PM Andrew Dul <<a href="mailto:andrew.dul@quark.net"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew.dul@quark.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>The draft policy as currently written does not provide
any additional limits against speculation. As drafted, it
allows any organization (including those who do not
operate networks) to obtain IPv4 addresses for the purpose
of leasing. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>With that policy change what types of limits does the
community think would be needed?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Andrew<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On 3/17/2022 3:00 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">+1 to both Owen and David Farmer's
comments. Leasing IPv4 space is likely the best solution
for some networks that need those addresses to operate
their network. If an organization wants to acquire and
lease out IPv4 space without providing bundled IPv4
transit, that should be allowed by policy. It might be
useful for ARIN policy to try to slightly dampen
speculation by requiring that organizations seeking to
acquire large blocks of IPv4 space demonstrate that
their current holdings are being efficiently used by the
organization they're registered to in whois. I am not
sure if this policy proposal does that to my
satisfaction, but once we ensure it does so, I would
likely support it.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Scott</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Mar 17, 2022
at 1:33 PM Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML <<a
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div><br>
<div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Mar 16, 2022, at 15:22 , Fernando
Frediani <<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>
<p>Hi David</p>
<p>If I understand correctly you seem to
have a view that there should be a ARIN
policy to permit IPv4 leasing just
because it is a reality and we kind of
have to accept it in our days. No we
don't, and that's for many different
reasons.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Well, of course, you are free to deny reality as
much as you want. Many people do. It’s not
particularly helpful in the discussion, however.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>I am used to see people saying the
brokers are doing a good thing for the
community by facilitating the things which
in reality is the opposite. It may look
like a good things, but the real
beneficiaries are only them who profit
from it without much concern of what is
fair or not to most organizations
involved.<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
You are actually mistaken here. I used to think
as you do, actually. I was very resistant to the
first “specified transfer” policies because of
some of the reasons you describe. However, what
you are failing to recognize is that:</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Brokers
and specified transfers were going to happen
with or without the RIRs. If they happened
without the RIRs,</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>there’d
be no accurate record of who was using which
address space and the provenance of addresses
would be</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>very
difficult to support or defend.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>*<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Benefit
to the community from brokers: (ethical) brokers
are familiar with the rules in the RIRs in which</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>they
operate and can assist their customers in
accurate and compliant registration updates and</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>aid
in keeping the allocation database(s) accurate.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>With
the economic realities of IPv4 addresses
becoming progressively more and more expensive
and the advent</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>of
ISPs with limited IPv4 resources available, it
is inevitable that more and more IP service
providers will be</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>doing
one or more of the following:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Separate
surcharges for IPv4 addresses</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Expecting
customers to supply their own IPv4 addresses</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Surcharges
for IPv4 services</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>IPv4
“installation charges” large enough to cover the
procurement of addresses</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>*<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Brokers
assist ISPs and customers in many of the above
circumstances.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>With
a variety of organizations holding IPv4
addresses that may or may not even known they
have them and whose</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>IPv4
resources may vastly exceed their needs, it is
(arguably) desirable to have those addresses be
transferred to parties</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>that
have current need for IPv4 addresses.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>*<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Brokers
provide a valuable service to the community
identifying and marketing these resources</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>*<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Paid
transfers provide an incentive for entities to
make more efficient use of the resources they
have in order</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>to
monetize the resources they no longer need.
Brokers are frequently able to assist in this
process.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>+<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>With
the high cost of acquisition, IPv4 addresses
have become a capital intensive part of any
network-dependent</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>business
model that must support IPv4. Further, there is
some risk that this capital outlay may be fore a
resource</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>which
will abruptly and quickly lose its value and no
longer be needed well before it can be amortized
as a capital</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>expenditure.
As such, it may make sense for some entities to
transfer that risk to another organization by
using</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>a
lease structure instead of purchasing the
addresses outright.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>*<span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Brokers
that provide IPv4 leasing in an ethical and
policy compliant way provide a valuable service</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>to
these businesses. Yes, their price per address
may eventually be more than it would have cost</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>them
to purchase the addresses, but the same is true
of virtually any rental situation. On the other
hand,</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>that
excess helps offset the risk that the lessor is
taking by owning a resource that may or may not
remain</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>valuable
and may or may not continue to produce revenue.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>IP Leasing is very different from IP
Transfer which I see not problem they
continue doing it. IP Transfer at least we
have some guarantees that the directly
receiving organization really justify for
them and that is a quiet important (I
would say fundamental) point to look at,
because that is fairer to everyone
involved. What guarantees we have when a
IP Leasing is done in that sense, that
fairness start to lack here.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
If we set the policies up correctly, we should
have the same exact guarantees on a lease.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>If
$ISP acquires a /10 through transfer and then
issues various subordinate prefixes to their
customer, the only guarantee</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>you
have that $ISP’s customers who receive the
addresses really justify them is that $ISP says
so. We generally trust $ISP</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>to
act in good faith.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>If
$LESSOR acquires a /10 through transfer and then
leases various subordinate prefixes to their
customers, we have pretty</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>much
the same guarantee with the additional bit that
$CUSTOMER is at least willing to pay enough for
the addresses to $LESSOR</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>to
make the lease make sense. In general, I think
it is somewhat safe to assume that $CUSTOMER is
not going to make a</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>monthly
recurring payment to $LESSOR for something they
don’t intend to use. If one’s intent is to
deprive the market and</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>inflate
the price, then the risk profile for such a
transaction is vastly more favorable if you
purchase rather than lease.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Sure,
there could be lessors that don’t get reasonable
justification for allocations from their
customers, but there are most</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>certainly
ISPs in that category as well. Either way,
you’ve got very little assurance. A lessor can
provide just as much</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>justification
to an RIR for the addresses they will allocate
to leases as an ISP can for addresses they will
lease to their</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>customers.
The only difference is a lease with connectivity
from the same company or a lease from a company
other than</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>the
one(s) providing connectivity.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>People see the brokers are doing a favor
to organizations in general by
facilitating they get some chunks of IPv4,
but that in reality makes the cost of IPv4
for both leasing and transfer more and
more expensive as it makes organization
even more dependent from these <span
lang="en">those crumbs that seem to be
offered with good intention</span> but
in reality it is feeding a system that is
contrary the interests to most
organizations involved.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Just as you are free to mount, balance, and
rotate your own tires, or, you can go to a tire
store and have them perform that service for a
fee, brokers provide a service for a fee. If you
want to obtain addresses in the transfer market
without a broker, you’re still free to do that.
Brokers are not driving the cost of IPv4… The
scarcity and difficulty of operating with IPv4
is driving the cost of IPv4. Brokers are along
for the ride providing a service and collecting
a fee for that service. Whether that fee is
reasonable or not is (and should be) entirely in
the eye of the customer. Customers are always
free to walk away and find a different supplier
or look for their addresses independently.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>It may sound a cliche but IPv4 is over
and organizations must learn how to
survive with what they have, reinvent
themselves and make better used of their
IPv4 resources, deploy a proper CGNAT,
deploy IPv6 either they like it or not,
etc. If an organization have so little or
none and need some minimal amount is fine
they seek for a Transfer of a minimal
amount with the help of brokers. <br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I agree. However, the increasing cost of IPv4 is
a natural and organic part of that process and
sticking our heads in the sand and pretending
that it is not the economic reality of how the
current world works will not help anyone. Not
the community, not organizations that are short
on IPv4 resources, and not the RIRs who are only
useful so long as their databases provide a
reasonably accurate reflection of the actual
utilization of the address space and who
controls it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A broker is an LIR just like an ISP. Since
ISPs are now charging for addresses independent
of connectivity and bandwidth, it only makes
sense that customers can shop for them
separately from different suppliers. Just like
you can buy tires for your car from the
dealership or from some other store that sells
and supports tires, IPv4 addresses are moving
that way as well. The RIRs can either recognize
this and adapt to it with policies that make
sense and preserve some of the things you’ve
outlined as concerns above, or, they can simply
deny the reality of IPv4 leasing and lose track
of how addresses are actually managed for some
significant chunks of the internet.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>Encouraging IP Leasing as if it were
something normal just "because it exists
today" is a shot in the foot that in the
long term only worsens the existing
scenario, it feeds a market without much
discretion increasing final prices for
everyone and what is the worst of all,
creates even more unfairness for everyone
who has always submitted to the rules we
have until today for distributing
addresses to those who really have a real
justification to keep control of that
resource that does not belong to them.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I don’t believe that a policy that merely allows
IPv4 leasing can be said to encourage it.
Rather, it permits it, recognizes that it exists
and is not going to stop existing just because
policy pretends it can’t exist.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The market is not likely to be significantly
swayed by policy in terms of pricing, with the
exception that AFRINIC has been able to preserve
a devalued price on addresses within their
region due to their restrictive lack of a
transfer policy for moving addresses to/from
AFRINIC. However, while this has the effect of
keeping AFRINIC IPv4 addresses less expensive on
the open market, it also leads to a significant
amount of utilization of those addresses outside
of policy and quite a bit of hoarding of
addresses by some of AFRINIC’s largest members.
ARIN’s counsel has advised against naming names
here, so I won’t, but if you want names, contact
me off list.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Owen</div>
<div> <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>Regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<div>On 16/03/2022 13:09, David Farmer via
ARIN-PPML wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Yes, bundling IPv4 addresses with
bandwidth is permitted, and in the
past was common practice, heck even
the expected practice. However, the
fact that IPv4 address demand isn't
decreasing significantly, the costs to
acquire new IPv4 addresses are
increasing significantly, and with the
increasing commoditization of
bandwidth, it is no longer
economically viable to bundle
bandwidth, and its associated
connectivity, with IPv4 addressing.
This is driving a structural
separation of bandwidth, connectivity,
and IPv4 addressing, from each other,
instead of bundling them together as
in the past.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let me state that differently; ISPs
are being driven, buy cost
conscience consumers, to separate the
costs of bandwidth and the costs of
the IPv4 addresses needed to utilize
the bandwidth from each other.
Minimally this separation is achieved
by accounting for the costs on
separate line items of a common bill
from a single provider. However, price
competition for bandwidth and IPv4
addresses separately will inevitably
drive a structural separation between
the two. Consumers will want the best
price they can get for bandwidth and
the best price they can get for IPv4
addresses, regardless of whether they
come from a single provider or not.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Some may argue this is being driven
by the existence of address brokers,
and their desire to make money, I
disagree. While address brokers making
money is the grease that keeps this
machine working, the need for the
machine is driven by; IPv4 free pool
exhaustion, the increasing cost of
IPv4 addresses, and the lack of
adoption of IPv6.</div>
<div>In other words, address brokers
wouldn't exist if there wasn't a
demand for their services.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In short, the economic conditions
that allowed for and even encouraged
the bundling of IPv4 addresses with
bandwidth and connectivity no longer
exist, that world is gone. While I
have not personally yet determined if
I support this particular policy
text, nevertheless, the time has come
to recognize the next step in this
inextricable evolution of IPv4 address
policy by the ARIN policy community
and permit IPv4 leasing.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks.</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On
Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 5:05 PM John
Santos <<a
href="mailto:john@egh.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">john@egh.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I
disagree. The addresses are useless
unless they ALSO purchase access
and <br>
routing from another network
operator. How is this cheaper?<br>
<br>
It is and always has been allowed to
lease bundled access of addresses
and <br>
connectivity from a LIR, without any
expense for purchasing those
addresses.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 3/11/2022 12:13 PM, Tom Fantacone
wrote:<br>
> I support the proposal as
written.<br>
> <br>
> It facilitates the provision of
a valuable service to a large swath
of the ARIN <br>
> community, namely the ability
of network operators with an
operational need to <br>
> lease IPv4 addresses from 3rd
party lessors at a fraction of the
cost of <br>
> purchasing those addresses.
Too often we have seen network
operators justify <br>
> their need for IPv4 space only
to find that they can't afford to
make the <br>
> purchase. They end up using
CGNAT or some other sub-optimal
solution.<br>
> <br>
> Bill, regarding your point "B",
by providing IPv4 leasing, these 3rd
parties are <br>
> certainly performing a function
that ARIN does not.<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> ---- On Thu, 10 Mar 2022
17:46:36 -0500 *William Herrin <<a
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">bill@herrin.us</a>>*
wrote ----<br>
> <br>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:24
PM ARIN <<a
href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> <mailto:<a
href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a>>><br>
> wrote:<br>
> > * ARIN-2021-6: Permit
IPv4 Leased Addresses for Purposes
of Determining<br>
> Utilization for Future
Allocations<br>
> <br>
> I continue to OPPOSE this
proposal because:<br>
> <br>
> A) It asks ARIN to
facilitate blatant and unapologetic
rent-seeking<br>
> behavior with changes to
public policy.<br>
> <br>
> B) It proposes that third
parties perform precisely and only
the<br>
> functions that ARIN itself
performs without any credible
compliance<br>
> mechanism to assure the
third party performs to ARIN's
standards or in<br>
> accordance with the
community's established number
policy.<br>
> <br>
> Regards,<br>
> Bill Herrin<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> -- <br>
> William Herrin<br>
> <a
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">bill@herrin.us</a> <mailto:<a
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">bill@herrin.us</a>><br>
> <a
href="https://bill.herrin.us/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://bill.herrin.us/</a> <<a
href="https://bill.herrin.us/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a><br>
> <mailto:<a
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
> <<a
href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>><br>
> Please contact <a
href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> <mailto:<a
href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a>>
if you experience any<br>
> issues.<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
> Please contact <a
href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> if
you experience any issues.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
John Santos<br>
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.<br>
781-861-0670 ext 539<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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a
href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> if
you experience any issues.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr">===============================================<br>
David Farmer <a
href="mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Email:farmer@umn.edu</a><br>
Networking & Telecommunication
Services<br>
Office of Information Technology<br>
University of Minnesota <br>
2218 University Ave SE Phone:
612-626-0815<br>
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell:
612-812-9952<br>
=============================================== </div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a>
if you experience any issues.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> if
you experience any issues.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">info@arin.net</a>
if you experience any issues.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Twitter: </span><a
href="https://twitter.com/holdenkarau"
style="font-size:12.8px" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://twitter.com/holdenkarau</a><br>
</div>
<div>Books (Learning Spark, High Performance
Spark, etc.): <a
href="https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9 </a></div>
<div>YouTube Live Streams: <a
href="https://www.youtube.com/user/holdenkarau"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.youtube.com/user/holdenkarau</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>
Please contact <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>