On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 4:51 AM John Curran <[email protected]> wrote: > On 7 Sep 2021, at 4:39 AM, arin-ppml <[email protected]> wrote: >> It is perfectly within ANY RIR’s policy if I distribute addresses to >> customers that are connected to me only via a GRE tunnel or other VPN. The >> only infrastructure required to support this would be a cloud-based VM that >> wouldn’t even need to be on my hardware. With that very thin fig leaf, I’ve >> met the test of connectivity that is required by some RIRs and I’m >> technically providing sufficient transit to meet the qualifications for >> address space. > > Correct, but making the representation that you need to have number resources > issued to provide VPN services when the actual intent is simply leasing would > be a fraudulent representation.
Hi John, This smells a bit like equivocation. If they're offering a VPN service then they're not just leasing addresses hence ARIN is still empowered to go after address lessors. I think Owen's point (and my own in a prior message) is that anyone whose -purpose- is to lease addresses can -construct- a negligible-cost, ARIN-compliant way to do so. So sure, you can bust the first handful who skip that step before the rest get wise. Then what? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin [email protected] https://bill.herrin.us/ _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
