<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 18/03/2022 11:52, Mike Burns wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:060d01d83ad7$d7a05be0$86e113a0$@iptrading.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style>@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;}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;}pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}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]-->
<div class="WordSection1"><clip><o:p></o:p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The primary value of the leasing company is
that they are allowing the effective financing of Ipv4 address
space through the taking-on of risk in the initial investment.
Currently there is no vehicle for this, and the result is
that smaller, newer, less-capitalized companies are required
to pay in full, up-front, for address blocks. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>That's the repeated history brokers have been trying to tell
organizations that have been facing challenges regarding IPv4
exhaustion either because they are new in the sector or most
commonly because they didn't bother to take any other measures to
deal with the new standard.<br>
Even newcomers have how to have access to some amounts to work
with without needing to lease them from an organization who don't
have justification to keep those addresses. And still brokers who
have been facilitating IP leasing play the good guys as if there
was not other options and we as a community who define the rules
would have to accept it and change the current rules for their own
benefit, not the community.</p>
<p>The reality is the IP Leasing increase costs for all (either
those who lease or transfer), eliminates accountability, increases
unfainess and still the history if that leasing comes save those
"poor less capable ones".<br>
</p>
<p>This "vehicle" expensive and unnecessary and there are options
available that not necessarily imposes worsening the whole system
for few people benefits. </p>
<p>Fernando</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:060d01d83ad7$d7a05be0$86e113a0$@iptrading.com">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Unless they lease them from the only
allowed lessors (per current policy), that is the IPv4-rich
incumbent owners.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So if you want to support the little guy, I
think you should support this policy, but if you want to
protect those who received address in the past that they no
longer need, then you should oppose this policy.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There are many other values the leasing
company provides, values stemming from skills related to
reputation, location, hijacking, recovery, and the
pre-identification of scammers/spammers, and values related to
the provision of addresses for temporary or seasonal use, or
to enter markets aggressively which may or may not pay off. As
the market matures, more value will no doubt be driven by
competition. Things like lease-to-own options, highly
efficient web or app-based access to lessors and lessees,
these are some things that spring to my mind as capabilities
to distinguish leasing companies from RIRs so as to provide
the value that the market requires. If there were no value
provided, why would anybody utilize their services?<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>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> ARIN-PPML <<a
href="mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Holden Karau<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 17, 2022 7:29 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:andrew.dul@quark.net"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew.dul@quark.net</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> arin-ppml <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>><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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">With that policy change what types
of limits does the community think would be needed?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 3/17/2022 3:00 PM, Scott
Leibrand wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+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.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Scott<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p>Hi David<o:p></o:p></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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ Brokers and specified
transfers were going to happen with or
without the RIRs. If they happened without
the RIRs,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">there’d be no accurate
record of who was using which address space
and the provenance of addresses would be<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">very difficult to support
or defend.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* Benefit to the
community from brokers: (ethical) brokers
are familiar with the rules in the RIRs in
which<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">they operate and can
assist their customers in accurate and
compliant registration updates and<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">aid in keeping the
allocation database(s) accurate.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ With the economic
realities of IPv4 addresses becoming
progressively more and more expensive and
the advent<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">of ISPs with limited IPv4
resources available, it is inevitable that
more and more IP service providers will be<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">doing one or more of the
following:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ Separate surcharges for
IPv4 addresses<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ Expecting customers to
supply their own IPv4 addresses<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ Surcharges for IPv4
services<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ IPv4 “installation
charges” large enough to cover the
procurement of addresses<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* Brokers assist ISPs and
customers in many of the above
circumstances.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ With a variety of
organizations holding IPv4 addresses that
may or may not even known they have them and
whose<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">IPv4 resources may vastly
exceed their needs, it is (arguably)
desirable to have those addresses be
transferred to parties<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">that have current need
for IPv4 addresses.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* Brokers provide a
valuable service to the community
identifying and marketing these resources<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* Paid transfers provide
an incentive for entities to make more
efficient use of the resources they have in
order<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">to monetize the resources
they no longer need. Brokers are frequently
able to assist in this process.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+ With the high cost of
acquisition, IPv4 addresses have become a
capital intensive part of any
network-dependent<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">business model that must
support IPv4. Further, there is some risk
that this capital outlay may be fore a
resource<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">which will abruptly and
quickly lose its value and no longer be
needed well before it can be amortized as a
capital<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">expenditure. As such, it
may make sense for some entities to transfer
that risk to another organization by using<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">a lease structure instead
of purchasing the addresses outright.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">* Brokers that provide
IPv4 leasing in an ethical and policy
compliant way provide a valuable service<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">to these businesses. Yes,
their price per address may eventually be
more than it would have cost<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">them to purchase the
addresses, but the same is true of virtually
any rental situation. On the other hand,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">that excess helps offset
the risk that the lessor is taking by owning
a resource that may or may not remain<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">valuable and may or may
not continue to produce revenue.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">If we set the policies up
correctly, we should have the same exact
guarantees on a lease.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If $ISP acquires a /10
through transfer and then issues various
subordinate prefixes to their customer, the
only guarantee<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">you have that $ISP’s
customers who receive the addresses really
justify them is that $ISP says so. We
generally trust $ISP<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">to act in good faith.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If $LESSOR acquires a /10
through transfer and then leases various
subordinate prefixes to their customers, we
have pretty<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">much the same guarantee
with the additional bit that $CUSTOMER is at
least willing to pay enough for the
addresses to $LESSOR<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">to make the lease make
sense. In general, I think it is somewhat
safe to assume that $CUSTOMER is not going
to make a<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">monthly recurring payment
to $LESSOR for something they don’t intend
to use. If one’s intent is to deprive the
market and<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">inflate the price, then
the risk profile for such a transaction is
vastly more favorable if you purchase rather
than lease.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sure, there could be
lessors that don’t get reasonable
justification for allocations from their
customers, but there are most<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">certainly ISPs in that
category as well. Either way, you’ve got
very little assurance. A lessor can provide
just as much<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">justification to an RIR
for the addresses they will allocate to
leases as an ISP can for addresses they will
lease to their<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">customers. The only
difference is a lease with connectivity from
the same company or a lease from a company
other than<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">the one(s) providing
connectivity.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<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. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Owen<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p>Regards<br>
Fernando<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 16/03/2022
13:09, David Farmer via ARIN-PPML
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In other words,
address brokers wouldn't exist if
there wasn't a demand for their
services.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">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/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://bill.herrin.us/</a> <<a
href="https://bill.herrin.us/"
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"
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"
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"
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"
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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">===============================================<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>
=============================================== <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>ARIN-PPML<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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>).<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><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><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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.<o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>ARIN-PPML<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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>).<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><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><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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.<o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt">Twitter: </span><a
href="https://twitter.com/holdenkarau"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt">https://twitter.com/holdenkarau</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</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>