Hi Brian,
But the addresses will be used to build and operate networks, or they could not be used as justification. Where are the cost and fairness issues? Even if a lessee could justify a purchase, that doesn’t mean they can afford a purchase. Which is fairer, to deny them addresses or effectively finance them through leasing? Regards, Mike From: Brian Jones <bjo...@vt.edu> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:35 PM To: Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com> Cc: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml@arin.net> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Retitled - Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Permit IPv4 Leased Addresses for Purposes of Determining Utilization for Future Allocations On Mar 11, 2022, at 1:25 PM, Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com <mailto:m...@iptrading.com> > wrote: Are you saying that because investors could buy more addresses (through demonstrating to ARIN utilization on operating networks) that would raise IPv4 purchase prices? Because they would add demand to the transfer market? I’m saying that IMO getting addresses from ARIN for the sole purpose of leasing them to an entity that would qualify on their own for Addresses from ARIN, Does not meet requirements of building and operating networks.
_______________________________________________ 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.
