On 08/05/2023 21:54, David Farmer wrote:
<clip>
In my opinion, your very technical definition of leasing is an
anachronism. The reality is if you want/need more than a /29 of
addresses, and you don’t already have them, you will need to pay for
them one way or another on top of your transit bandwidth, through the
transfer market, leasing them from your transit provider, or leasing
them from a 3rd party, this is today’s reality, like it or not.
Getting it from the transit provider who is building Internet
infrastructure and providing connectivity is fine, has always been.
Getting from a 3rd party who is just speculating around IP space and not
interested in building any Internet stuff not. It does not matter what
reality may be happening in some places, if that is wrong it does not
make it look right because some are doing and find that a normal thing
because it fits to their commercial needs. Is Congress willing to change
law to make crimes in the top of list not to be a crime anymore because
that is happening more often?
You are only authorized to trade with what you bought and own.
Fernando
Thanks
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 18:23 Fernando Frediani <fhfredi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Willian. A customer who holds an ASN and is a ARIN member
should not get IP space to announce with their own ASN from the
ISP provider but directly with ARIN in all cases.
Legal risk will always exists and it is not because it exists it
should not be taken, just need to evaluated and worked.
There has been a proposal presented not much a while ago that
intended to get that separation better worded and which was still
in the process of getting feedback and improvements, but AC
quickly dismissed it in a questionable way despite there has been
people interested in discussing and improving it. A pity. There
has not even been a chance to get a improved text in that sense.
And honestly there will always be some way someone will find out
to try to circumvent rules and I don't think there will be a
perfect text, but a reasonable one that can cover most scenarios
can play a important role in reducing scenarios where resources
can be misused.
On 08/05/2023 19:45, William Herrin wrote:
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:26 PM Fernando Frediani<fhfredi...@gmail.com>
<mailto:fhfredi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Another thing which many here are targeting about IP leasing
in the sense of renting, speculation made by those who don't
build or offer any Internet infrastructure and services. In other
words someone holding IP space and not using it to build any
Internet infrastructure and services.
Hi Fernando,
You may be missing my point. How do you differentiate in policy between:
Scenario 1: ISP A provides a T1 and a /24. ISP B provides a gigabit
ethernet. Customer routes with BGP on both but depreferences ISP A so
it never shows up in the Internet BGP tables.
Scenario 2: Pretextual ISP C (the defacto address leaser) provides a
/24 and a VPN (or virtual machine other nil-cost transit consuming
mechanism). ISP D provides a gigabit ethernet. Customer routes with
BGP on both but depreferences ISP C so it never shows up in the
Internet BGP tables.
Scenario 1 is considered reasonable and has been for the entire
lifetime of the RIRs.
Scenario 2 is the objectionable address leasing arrangement with a
tiny bit of fluff to bring it into technical compliance with ARIN
policy.
You can't tell ARIN to just exercise their judgement whether something
is defacto leasing. That creates legal risk to the organization where
they can't effectively act against the people they "know" to be
leasers.
You have to write a policy that outright breaks scenario #2 without
harming scenario #1.That's the utilization count approach. ISP A in
scenario #1 is not particularly bothered if ARIN gets a bee in their
bonnet about counting that /24 utilized. So they have to be at 81%
instead of 80%. Same difference.
ISP C in scenario #2, that's their entire business. If ARIN counts it
unutilized, they're out of business.
Get it?
Regards,
Bill Herrin
_______________________________________________
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.
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:far...@umn.edu <mailto:email%3afar...@umn.edu>
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
_______________________________________________
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.
