[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 - Clarification: Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Owen, RIPE continues to apply needs-tests to inter-regional transfers from ARIN. And leasing out addresses is considered to be a valid justification. The authors continue to mislead. What problem does this policy seek to correct? Can it be stated in a single sentence rather than book

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 - Clarification: Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

> 3. Situation in other regions > - > In other RIRs, the leasing of addresses is not authorized either and > since it is not explicit in their policy manuals either, this proposal > will be presented as well. This simply isn’t the fact. In ARIN, Leasing is not

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 - Clarification: Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

As per the original version of this policy, it still does not deal with a) assignment of address blocks to customers, which is a lease, and would be blocked by this policy b) issues with terminology creep - for instance a DHCP lease or delegation (a common term) c) the valid cases for

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi, I am one of the co-chairs of RIPE's Address Policy WG. I'm not commenting on the specifics of this proposal, just to add a clarification below. On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 at 10:00, Shaila Sharmin wrote: [...] > 3. Situation in other regions > - > In other RIRs, the

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Jordi, > 1) > > > > - I agree with the concept of prohibiting leases, but the proposal > > should not affect to the party who has leased the IPv4 from another party. > > If an APNIC or APNIC NIR member is doing something wrong, neither APNIC or > the NIR ca prevent the effects on third

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

are almost 10 years old.Regards,MikeSent from my T-Mobile 5G Device Original message From: "jordi.palet--- via SIG-policy" Date: 9/2/23 12:57 PM (GMT+02:00) To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Accept

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

0, Lu Heng >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:h...@anytimechinese.com>> escribió: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jordi: >>>>>>>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

them. >>>>>>>>>>> That’s it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>> Jordi >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

ovide a succinct problem statement that states the >>>>>> problem we are trying to solve? >>>>>> The one I can see is the claim that there is an existing “security >>>>>> problem” on the

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 16:32, jordi.palet--- via SIG-policy < >>>>>> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Mike, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> T

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> RIPE's current policy is you ask you get, no need to provide a >>>>>>>>>> reason. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Of course that means you can get IP for leasing, you can even

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Mike, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no inaccuracy on the RIPE point. Long time ago I made the >>>>>>> question to RIPE staff and a justification on an original request for IP

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

to RIPE staff and a justification on an original request for IP >>>>>> resources for leasing will not have been accepted as a valid one. Not >>>>>> talking about transfers here, just original justification of the need. >>>>>> >>>>>> Work

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

; reason. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Of course that means you can get IP for leasing, you can even get IP >>>>>>>>>> for re

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

gt;>>>>>>>>> Hi Mike, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is no inaccuracy on the RIPE point. Long time ago I made the >>>>>>>>>> question to RIPE staff and a justification on an original

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

. Not >>>>>> talking about transfers here, just original justification of the need. >>>>>> >>>>>> Working in a new version following all the inputs. Tks! >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards,

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

gt;>> The revised Section 3 contains the same inaccuracy that I have pointed >>>>> out before in other fora to the authors. >>>>> Notably the situation described in RIPE below is false. >>>>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

e >>>>>>>>> need. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Working in a new version following all the inputs. Tks! >>>>>>>>> >>>>&g

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

t;>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Jordi >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @jordipalet >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Satoru, Tks for your inputs. However, I’ve some doubts. 1) > > - I agree with the concept of prohibiting leases, but the proposal > should not affect to the party who has leased the IPv4 from another party. If an APNIC or APNIC NIR member is doing something wrong, neither APNIC or the

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

> The revised Section 3 contains the same inaccuracy that I have pointed >>>>> out before in other fora to the authors. >>>>> Notably the situation described in RIPE below is false. >>>>> RIPE only applies needs-tests to inbound in

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

gt; Notably the situation described in RIPE below is false. >>>> RIPE only applies needs-tests to inbound inter-regional transfers, and >>>> in this case leasing them out is a justified use. >>>> If you don’t accept my assertion, I invite you to contact RIPE direc

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

gt;>>>>> Notably the situation described in RIPE below is false. >>>>>>> RIPE only applies needs-tests to inbound inter-regional transfers, and >>>>>>> in this case leasing them out is a justified use. >>>&g

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

can see is the claim that there is an existing “security >>> problem” on the Internet related directly to blocks being used outside the >>> registrant’s “immediate physical control.” >>> Maybe the proposal would be e

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

f it was simplified to > something like “Addresses may only be utilized by networks that the > registrant has immediate physical control of.”? > Because then it would be easier to block and filter content, making it safer > for the community? > > Regards, > Mike

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Maybe the proposal would be easier to understand if it was simplified to >>> something like “Addresses may only be utilized by networks that the >>> registrant has immediate physical control of.”? >>> Because then it would be easier to block and filter content,

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

As I’ve explained before, the license renewal and other sections of the membership agreement and policies, allows APNIC to investigate whatever they believe is needed, to verify the proper usage of the resources, if documents are correct, etc., etc. Neve mind APNIC has such a mechanism in

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

> On Aug 31, 2023, at 22:26, Noah wrote: > > > > On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, 07:29 Sanjeev Gupta, > wrote: >> >> >> > If the leasing of addresses is authorized, contrary to the original >> spirit of the policies and the very existence of the RIRs, the link >> between

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, 07:29 Sanjeev Gupta, wrote: > > > > If the leasing of addresses is authorized, contrary to the original > spirit of the policies and the very existence of the RIRs, the link > between connectivity and addresses disappears, which also poses security > problems, since, in the

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

It's very good to have your feedback for the secretariat, thanks Tsurumaki-san. Please feel free to let us know of any other improvements that we can help with, any time. Paul. Get BlueMail for Android On Sep 1, 2023, at 13:16, Satoru Tsurumaki mailto:stsur...@gmail.com>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Dear Colleagues, I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Japan Open Policy Forum Steering Team. I would like to express my gratitude to Policy-Sig Chair/Co-Chair and the APNIC Secretariat. In the past, policy proposals were posted to the SIG-Policy ML in batches after the proposal deadline four weeks before

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

> If the leasing of addresses is authorized, contrary to the original spirit of the policies and the very existence of the RIRs, the link between connectivity and addresses disappears, which also poses security problems, since, in the absence of connectivity, the resource holder who has received

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

cy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable That's correct, as I stated earlier each region has unique network requirements and circumstances that may warrant different approaches to resource management. Instead of adopting a one-size-fits-all approach, We

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Matt: AFRINIC has set great example of what you have described here. Countless lawsuit with it’s attempt of “assisted audit” policing effect. https://afrinic.net/membership/assisted-review/ I guess jordi just want APNIC follow the suit. I have no address space in APNIC, but I know for a

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi all, First, this policy was proposed only last year and did not gain the support it needed. My understanding is this wasn't just due to inaccuracies, but largely due to opposition to the policy itself. Why are we seeing this resurrected again so soon with only minor changes? We all lead

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

g it safer for the community? Regards,Mike Burns   From: Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 7:30 PMTo: sig-policy@lists.apnic.netSubject: [sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

That's correct, as I stated earlier each region has unique network requirements and circumstances that may warrant different approaches to resource management. Instead of adopting a one-size-fits-all approach, We should consider the specific needs of our region when crafting policies. Does APNIC

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Different RIRs have different rules (different policies). However, RIPE can also investigate any case for not following policies, no difference. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet > El 30 ago 2023, a las 12:28, Arash Naderpour > escribió: > > Hi Jordi, > > I didn't ask about the policies, > I

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Jordi, I didn't ask about the policies, I meant if they have authority to investigate the "usage of IP addresses", As an example, with RIPE NCC you get an /24 when you become a member (you still need to wait in their queue). But I never heard that they investigate the usage of the IP addresses

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Jordi, Can you please provide some more details on this: "APNIC (and all the RIRs) already have the authority to investigate any possible usage of the addresses against the policies" I'm interested to know exactly if and how they are authorised to investigate the "usage of the addresses".

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Sunny, all, 1) The proposal only mentions leasing as an example of what is not valid, and we say "any form of leasing”, so we don’t need a definition. 2) Proposals don’t state how the implementation must be done. There are ways to automate this verification up to certain extent, such as

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

content, making it > safer for the community? > > Regards, > Mike Burns > > > > *From:* Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi > *Sent:* Monday, August 21, 2023 7:30 PM > *To:* sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > *Subject:* [sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing &g

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

> > Regards, > Mike Burns > > > > From: Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 7:30 PM > To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of > Resources is not Acceptable > > --

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Ying, The proposals or policies don’t need to state how they are implemented. The is a problem specific of the secretariat. There are ways to automate, in a first step, if resources are announced by an AS which is not in the path of the original resource holder, for example. Of course, this

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Christopher, Exactly, we don’t pretend to disallow leasing associated to connectivity services, and we do believe the text is clear on that, because we only mention leasing as an example of what is not allowed as a justification of the need and consequently if it was not part of the

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Aurimas, Policies are written in a different way than legal text and there is nothing in the PDP that say that it should be otherwise. If you think something is redundant, we made it to increase the clarity, but of course, we could always improve, just make us some specific proposal so we

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Arash, APNIC (and all the RIRs) already have the authority to investigate any possible usage of the addresses against the policies. If you justified a need and you now make a different usage, which is against the policies or the original justification, you are in contractual breach, and the

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Abhishek, A proposal don’t need to identify the steps for a RIR to implement it, and what the proposal do is to ensure that APNIC has a clear mandate in order to decide that if the original justified need is not existing anymore, the delegation is not valid. I don’t think is fair to allow

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Owen, In this version of the proposal, we mention leasing only as an indication of what is not allowed in APNIC policies, despite there is not a definition of that in the policies neither in the proposal, because, as you said, there are many possible cases that will fall into what is

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

to block and filter content, making it safer for the community? Regards, Mike Burns From: Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 7:30 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

--- Secretariat Impact Assessment: prop-148-v004 APNIC notes that this proposal suggests explicitly stating in the APNIC Internet Number Resources policy document that

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Assigned is still leased in one form or another unless that assignment is portable and the customer can take it with them when they leave the carrier I. Question. That’s not generally the case. OwenOn Aug 13, 2023, at 02:49, Noah wrote:I know a lot of end-users who went to the RIR to ask for /24

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

There are many customers that have a /24 or more leased from their provider. Claiming that anyone needing a /24 or shorter prefix must go to an RIR or the market is current reality, but not historically true. Lots of older provider assignments of /24 and shorter prefixes exist in the wild and

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hello Team, I am in support of the concept, however I believe some policy wording changes need to be made, in order to ensure that it does not impact members who have a legitimate business case for leasing IP addresses. There are businesses who do lease IP resources as part of a service, for

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi, I'm opposing the proposed policy change, I have concerns about the potential implications of the proposed policy change, particularly in regards to granting APNIC the authority to investigate and make decisions regarding the daily usage of IP addresses. The proposed policy change introduces

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Shaila, - *Do you support or oppose the proposal?* Support the proposal with riders. - *Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?* i)How will APNIC identify "*not connected*" Networks but are suspected to lease IP addresses? ii) Can limited leasing be allowed to

[sig-policy] Re: New version: prop-148 Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

As written, this policy is absurd. Virtually all internet numbers in use are leased by the providers that they are registered to. The question here is whether or not to require that connectivity services be provided as part of the lease arrangement. I’m OK with whatever the community decides

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Marco, Small clarification from our side. We actually checked this with the policy officer around March-April-May 2022, if I recall correctly. What we got from that email exchange was that "leasing" is not defined, but also was not explicitly allowed neither disallowed as a valid

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Thank you Marco to clarify the current policy stated in RIPE. Thank you, Ernest Tse Marco Schmidt 於 2022年9月12日 週一 下午4:39寫道： > Hello Ernest and colleagues, > > I would like to provide some clarification for the RIPE region. > > The proposal states > -- > In other RIRs, the leasing

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hello Ernest and colleagues, I would like to provide some clarification for the RIPE region. The proposal states -- In other RIRs, the leasing of addresses is not authorized either and since it is not explicit in their policy manuals either, this proposal will be presented as

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

A simple google will tell you I am not new to the policy forum. Yes, I have won the lawsuit, the judgement is in public, google it. As I said many times before, RIR is small private companies can not leverage it’s monopoly position on third party, I simply proven that point—the usage of the IP

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

False information again. There was not win in the lawsuit, specially about the usage of the IP address. Please refrain from misinforming APNIC community for your own business benefit. You may be new to policy forums, don't seem to know how things have always worked and keep making attacks

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi As for afrinic, I won the lawsuit, and see what happens to afrinic is public information, google it. LACNIC I honestly don’t know due to their primary language is Spanish. ARIN makes it very clear, you can not use lease as a way to get new resources(basically take advantage of knowledge of

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

This is totally false information. Try to Leasing IP addresses in AfriNic or LACNIC and see what will happen with the resources you are responsible for. And for ARIN try to justify the need for the resources saying they will be leased and see what will happen. Fernando On 09/09/2022 07:01,

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

PALET MARTINEZ Sent: Friday, 9 September 2022 5:27 PM To: Richard Ham ; sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hi Richard, We like it or not, the policies are our laws. You don’t like law

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Ernest: RIPE, ARIN,AFRINIC does not have any of the similar policy. Due to language barriers, I am not familiar with LACINIC. On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 17:51, ERNEST TSE wrote: > Hi All, > > Just take a look of this new policy suggested and I know this is still in > discussion stage. >

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi All, Just take a look of this new policy suggested and I know this is still in discussion stage. First at all, my business don't have any IP leasing business in APNIC region. And majorly my business is doing hosting business, and now I'm sitting in RIPE region (UK) for my business. For my

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Yesterday, Kohli played an amazing inning, even some of his biggest critics couldn't resist praising his efforts. 122 with a strike rate of 200 against a quality attack is remarkable, a true King. Let's not even talk about what happened a night before with back to back sixes. On the other side of

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Aftab: Any of APNIC document can not be outside scope of law. Or you suggesting that clause will except APNIC from rule of law? On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 16:01, Aftab Siddiqui wrote: > Hi Lu, > > On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 16:35, Lu Heng wrote: > >> Hi Andrew: >> >> No, I did not say the registrar

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hi Lu, On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 16:35, Lu Heng wrote: > Hi Andrew: > > No, I did not say the registrar has no power to enforce its own contract. > > I am saying the power in such a contract is very limited. > > And policies being made here can not dump out of legal limitation of a > contract. >

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Richard From: Fernando Frediani Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2022 9:54 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hello Aftab Let me address this concern so perhaps it gets better

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

ting mechanisms are sufficient. Feel free to demonstrate that they are not with evidence. Andrew Get Outlook for iOS From: Fernando Frediani Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 1:11:49 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resourc

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

t;> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me ask Secretariat a simple question: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

ly disconnecting itself from >>>>>> reality. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Before Jordi and Fernado claim "community wants people to return >>>>>> space", how about getting 50% members' signatures to prove that point? >>>>>

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

gt; plan to enforce it without being sued out of existence? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The problem of this policy development process is, the real community >>>>> is not involved. The real community is the near 1 members and bi

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

gt;>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 11:14, Andrew Yager wrote: >>>> >>>> Fernando - you repeatedly state that there is an issue this policy is >>>> addressing. This is your base assumption. >>>> >>>> >>

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

signatures to prove that point? >>> >>> >>> >>> And the transfer data simply proves no one wants to return the space, >>> and the real community wants a market. >>> >>> >>> >>> I believe in order for RIR to survive, the small room of policy >>> sp

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

ailed >> to even have 10% of members supporting him), has to stop. >> >> >> >> Policy needs to be made by the real members of APNIC, and real end users >> who are using the internet and someone can get a large percentage of the >> population to agree to them. >> >

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

atedly state that there is an issue this policy is > addressing. This is your base assumption. > > > > I reiterate that to date the existing mechanisms are sufficient. > > > > Feel free to demonstrate that they are not with evidence. > > > > Andrew > >

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

reement merely states connectivity. > > > > This is why definitions are important. And once again why this proposal > over reaches, and is not necessary. > > > > Andrew > > > > Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> > -- >

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

; > Andrew > > > > Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> > ------ > > *From:* JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy > *Sent:* Thursday, September 8, 2022 9:11:51 PM > *To:* sig-policy > *Subject:* [sig-policy] Re: New version - p

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hello Aftab Let me address this concern so perhaps it gets better clarified. If an organization who is for example a CDN provider and asks APNIC for an ASN number and IP addresses and have justified will use them

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Hello Aftab Let me address this concern so perhaps it gets better clarified. If an organization who is for example a CDN provider and asks APNIC for an ASN number and IP addresses and have justified will use them to provide hosting and CDN services to their customers through the

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Get Outlook for iOS From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 9:11:51 PM To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hi Aftab, Andrew (answering both), I can’t believe

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

ursday, September 8, 2022 9:32:51 PM To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Not responding for this specific case, but in general: If the original resource holder is NOT in the path, I can’t see how they are of

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Not responding for this specific case, but in general: If the original resource holder is NOT in the path, I can’t see how they are offering the addresses as part of a connectivity service. Happy to be enlighted! Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 8/9/22, 13:21, "Aftab

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

o: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hi Andrew, The membership agreement also calls for policy compliance. I guess we agree on that. If that’s the case, then we need to double check with the secre

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

r 8, 2022 8:53:38 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable And by the way, and this key with any lack of policy compliance. All the RIRs will always attempt to recover the situation in case o

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

EZ via sig-policy Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 9:11:51 PM To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hi Aftab, Andrew (answering both), I can’t believe that we need to define “direct connectivity” as well. Is

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

ALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 8:53:38 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable And by the way, and this key with any lack of policy compliance. All the RIRs wi

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

skipping the other bits.. If there is not a direct link from an LIR to a customer, then is not a > direct connectivity. So, in that case is not tied to a connectivity service. > > > I have a simple question, is this an example of leasing or not? 103.93.157.0/25 allocated to an entity with 2 ASNs

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

policy Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 9:11:51 PM To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Hi Aftab, Andrew (answering both), I can’t believe that we need to define “direct connectivity” as well. Is not

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

e Officer Brisbane, Australia (AEST) • m...@oneqode.com • +61 406 778 038 From: Mike Burns Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2022 6:52 AM To: 'Fernando Frediani' ; sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Mike Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device Original message From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy Date: 9/7/22 8:54 AM (GMT-05:00) To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

That’s the role of education. Andrew Get Outlook for iOS From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 8:32:35 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

iani Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 1:11:49 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Andrew your understanding about my statements is wrong. it is unnecessary the secretariat to confirm such poi

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 8:53:38 PM To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acce

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

om • +61 406 778 038 From: Mike Burns Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2022 6:52 AM To: 'Fernando Frediani' ; sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Alas, Fernando, there is no alternative “drug” for pe

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

> > Hello, > > > > If we don't have a definition of Leasing we can't fully consider the > issues of enforcement, among other items. > > > > As with many things the devil is in the details. > > > > Regards, > > > > Mike > > > > > >

[sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable

sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New version - prop-148: Clarification - Leasing of Resources is not Acceptable Alas, Fernando, there is no alternative “drug” for people to live without IPv4. Banning leasing hurts the smallest and poorest of companies most. And you cannot elucidate

  1   2   >