That's the main point. If such thing would ever becomes normal I have no
doubt it would create "internet landlords" and that's one of the reasons
I consider leasing a total misuse of the IP address propose.
I see by the many different views of the questions and even from those
who would be prepared to accept it, that there reservations and concerns
so clearly there is something that 'doesn't look good' and is strange to
the question.
There are already mechanisms to accommodate the needs of those who need
more IP addresses, the need of newcomers even with some restrictions
which has been working well since it was implemented and in my view
leases only accomplish very specific the needs of a few mentioned.
Regards
Fernando
On 03/11/2019 19:56, scott wrote:
IMHO, we should do everything we can to prevent "internet landlords."
Further, I do not see a legitimage use case problem that is solved by
allowing leasing that is not solved by upstream provided address
space, or barring that, 4.10 of the NRPM. If we want to enable
spammers, attack networks, and other bad actors, then leasing is for
sure a great solution for them, and the "internet slumlords" that
would provide their resources.
Scott
On Sun, 3 Nov 2019, Martin Hannigan wrote:
On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 10:30 PM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote:
[ clip ]
However, what I do not want to see is a situation where we
permit the desire to lease space as a justification for
obtaining space through the transfer market (or
any other mechanism). If you want to leas space you already have,
then fine. But the desire to lease space in and of itself should not
qualify as “utilization” or
“need” in evaluation of any form of resource request.
Needs a little more clarify for me. Either the lessor or lessee has a
right
to use the numbers as justification? The lessee may be the logical
party,
but seems less likely to be in the transfer market. However, if they are
leasing numbers they may have legitimate need. On the other hand, if a
lessor has a ratio like an ISP or other provider using numbers in an
aggregated manner _and_ the lessee can't use the lease as
justification for
transfers, that would seem to be inline with current practice. I do
think
legitimately "in use" addresses should be eligible for "need" credit.
Isn't
the idea that "access" is being facilitated by providing the numbers?
You
can use RFC 1918 address space as a justification for need and the
numbers
are technically "not connected". I'm thinking source nor business model
should matter, but that we're careful who is getting credit for them.
Just
saying that made me wonder if this is even worth addressing.
Feels like it is more sensible to allow the both to demonstrate use as a
justification and let ARIN process sort it out.
$0.02
Best,
-M<
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
