<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Owen</p>
<p>You efforts to defend brokers interests and less of community
interests are curious. And that hasn't been just in ARIN which is
even more curious this increased efforts.<br>
Interesting as well the conflict of "they will happen without the
RIRs" and "ethical and policy compliant".</p>
<p>Oh and funny joke that a broker is like a LIR.<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 17/03/2022 17:32, Owen DeLong wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:4F42FD9A-0400-4D30-9858-72E5984B3EFA@delong.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br class="">
<div class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Mar 16, 2022, at 15:22 , Fernando Frediani
<<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">Hi David</p>
<p class="">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 class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">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 class="">
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Brokers
and specified transfers were going to happen with or without
the RIRs. If they happened without the RIRs,</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>there’d
be no accurate record of who was using which address space and
the provenance of addresses would be</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>very
difficult to support or defend.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>*<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Benefit
to the community from brokers: (ethical) brokers are familiar
with the rules in the RIRs in which</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>they
operate and can assist their customers in accurate and
compliant registration updates and</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>aid
in keeping the allocation database(s) accurate.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>With
the economic realities of IPv4 addresses becoming
progressively more and more expensive and the advent</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>of
ISPs with limited IPv4 resources available, it is inevitable
that more and more IP service providers will be</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>doing
one or more of the following:</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Separate
surcharges for IPv4 addresses</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Expecting
customers to supply their own IPv4 addresses</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Surcharges
for IPv4 services</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>IPv4
“installation charges” large enough to cover the procurement
of addresses</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>*<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Brokers
assist ISPs and customers in many of the above circumstances.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>With
a variety of organizations holding IPv4 addresses that may or
may not even known they have them and whose</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>IPv4
resources may vastly exceed their needs, it is (arguably)
desirable to have those addresses be transferred to parties</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>that
have current need for IPv4 addresses.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>*<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Brokers
provide a valuable service to the community identifying and
marketing these resources</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>*<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Paid
transfers provide an incentive for entities to make more
efficient use of the resources they have in order</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>to
monetize the resources they no longer need. Brokers are
frequently able to assist in this process.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>+<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>With
the high cost of acquisition, IPv4 addresses have become a
capital intensive part of any network-dependent</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>business
model that must support IPv4. Further, there is some risk that
this capital outlay may be fore a resource</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>expenditure.
As such, it may make sense for some entities to transfer that
risk to another organization by using</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>a
lease structure instead of purchasing the addresses outright.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>*<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Brokers
that provide IPv4 leasing in an ethical and policy compliant
way provide a valuable service</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>to
these businesses. Yes, their price per address may eventually
be more than it would have cost</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>them
to purchase the addresses, but the same is true of virtually
any rental situation. On the other hand,</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>valuable
and may or may not continue to produce revenue.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">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 class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If
$ISP acquires a /10 through transfer and then issues various
subordinate prefixes to their customer, the only guarantee</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>to
act in good faith.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If
$LESSOR acquires a /10 through transfer and then leases
various subordinate prefixes to their customers, we have
pretty</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Sure,
there could be lessors that don’t get reasonable justification
for allocations from their customers, but there are most</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </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 class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>the
one(s) providing connectivity.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">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 class="VIiyi" 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" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">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 class="">
</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 class="">
</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" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">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 class="">
</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 class="">
</div>
<div>Owen</div>
<div> <br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="">Regards<br class="">
Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/03/2022 13:09, David
Farmer via ARIN-PPML wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAN-Dau1c0=nk7DGasM3_w16y_q+OMjO8cvv0U-MyQ8aRp0zUyw@mail.gmail.com"
class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">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 class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">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 class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">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 class="">In other words, address brokers wouldn't
exist if there wasn't a demand for their services.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">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 class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thanks.</div>
<br class="">
<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 class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px
0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px;
border-left-style: solid; border-left-color:
rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">I
disagree. The addresses are useless unless they
ALSO purchase access and <br class="">
routing from another network operator. How is
this cheaper?<br class="">
<br class="">
It is and always has been allowed to lease bundled
access of addresses and <br class="">
connectivity from a LIR, without any expense for
purchasing those addresses.<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 3/11/2022 12:13 PM, Tom Fantacone wrote:<br
class="">
> I support the proposal as written.<br
class="">
> <br class="">
> It facilitates the provision of a valuable
service to a large swath of the ARIN <br class="">
> community, namely the ability of network
operators with an operational need to <br class="">
> lease IPv4 addresses from 3rd party lessors
at a fraction of the cost of <br class="">
> purchasing those addresses. Too often we
have seen network operators justify <br class="">
> their need for IPv4 space only to find that
they can't afford to make the <br class="">
> purchase. They end up using CGNAT or some
other sub-optimal solution.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> Bill, regarding your point "B", by providing
IPv4 leasing, these 3rd parties are <br class="">
> certainly performing a function that ARIN
does not.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> <br class="">
> <br class="">
> ---- 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 class="">
> <br class="">
> 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
class="">
> wrote:<br class="">
> > * ARIN-2021-6: Permit IPv4 Leased
Addresses for Purposes of Determining<br class="">
> Utilization for Future Allocations<br
class="">
> <br class="">
> I continue to OPPOSE this proposal
because:<br class="">
> <br class="">
> A) It asks ARIN to facilitate blatant and
unapologetic rent-seeking<br class="">
> behavior with changes to public policy.<br
class="">
> <br class="">
> B) It proposes that third parties perform
precisely and only the<br class="">
> functions that ARIN itself performs
without any credible compliance<br class="">
> mechanism to assure the third party
performs to ARIN's standards or in<br class="">
> accordance with the community's
established number policy.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> Regards,<br class="">
> Bill Herrin<br class="">
> <br class="">
> <br class="">
> -- <br class="">
> William Herrin<br class="">
> <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
class="">
> <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
class="">
>
_______________________________________________<br
class="">
> ARIN-PPML<br class="">
> You are receiving this message because
you are subscribed to<br class="">
> 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
class="">
> <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
class="">
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<br class="">
> <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
class="">
> <<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
class="">
> 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 class="">
> issues.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> <br class="">
> <br class="">
> <br class="">
>
_______________________________________________<br
class="">
> ARIN-PPML<br class="">
> You are receiving this message because you
are subscribed to<br class="">
> 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
class="">
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<br class="">
> <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
class="">
> 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 class="">
<br class="">
-- <br class="">
John Santos<br class="">
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.<br class="">
781-861-0670 ext 539<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br
class="">
ARIN-PPML<br class="">
You are receiving this message because you are
subscribed to<br class="">
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
class="">
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<br class="">
<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
class="">
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 class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="" clear="all">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
-- <br class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">===============================================<br
class="">
David Farmer <a
href="mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">Email:farmer@umn.edu</a><br
class="">
Networking & Telecommunication Services<br
class="">
Office of Information Technology<br class="">
University of Minnesota <br class="">
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<br
class="">
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<br
class="">
=============================================== </div>
</div>
<br class="">
<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 moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" moz-do-not-send="true">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" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>
Please contact <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:info@arin.net" moz-do-not-send="true">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
ARIN-PPML<br class="">
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br
class="">
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br
class="">
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br
class="">
<a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br
class="">
Please contact <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br
class="">
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>