Hi Albert, Those idyllic days are gone with the free pool. Trying to hearken back to them is ignoring current reality. That genie won't go back in the bottle.
Also, strangely, I am leasing out IPv6 as well as IPv4. Not sure why, the company I am leasing to has a much larger IPv6 block. I wouldn't mind transfer costs accurately represented in ARIN transfer fee charges. Regards, Mike -----Original Message----- From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 4:11 AM To: Fernando Frediani <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Remove Circuit Requirement Using leases as justification for more addresses I believe is wrong. I think that ARIN worked better when there was a free pool, and people received from ARIN what they needed, and returned those addresses that were no longer needed. That day has long passed in the IPv4 world. Notice how much difference there is in the operation of ARIN in respect to IPv4 resources, and compare that to 32 bit ASN's and IPv6. This difference in behavior is caused by the shortage of IPv4 addresses. As to the remaining items, ARIN operates much differently, because both ASN's and IPv6 have a free pool. Because of this, there is no gaming the system, and these pools work more like the original way that ARIN began. Initial IPv6 amounts are generally large enough that most do not come back for more, meaning less work for ARIN staff. Note the absence of transfer options for IPv6, or any pressure to allow sales and leasing of IPv6 addresses. Because IPv6 addresses can be obtained at any justified level directly from ARIN, no one is going to try to promote sales and leasing of IPv6 addresses, because there is a natural price cap, since they always can be obtained directly from ARIN. This, and the lack of IPv6 LRSA's means that we operate in IPv6 in a more natural mode, where addresses are obtained as needed, and returned when they are not. This is part of the reason that I like IPv6, because it is so much easier to deal with. It is much the same mode that existed in IPv4 before exhaust. It reminds me of a simpler time, where there is not that Dog Eat Dog mode that seems to dominate IPv4 currently. As predicted, we will likely drag this at least another 20 years before IPv6 becomes the majority protocol, and the IPv4 market starts to collapse. I recently learned that NCP and TCP were also run in a dual stack format before NCP was turned off on 1/1/1983. I was originally misinformed that it was a hot cut. The part we missed is that a shutoff date for IPv4 should have been set long before IPv4 ran out, but this was never done, and I doubt that it would ever happen now. IPv6 and ASN's seem to take care of themselves. Most entities once they receive their initial block of IPv6 and an ASN process very few transactions related to those items. Very few have come back for a second byte of the IPv6 apple. On the other hand, I believe that a large amount of the ARIN expenses and staff time revolve around IPv4 and transfers. While the transfer fees help with these expenses, I do not think that these fees cover all such costs. When we get to the point that IPv6 is the main protocol, I believe that ARIN's Costs will fall, since the staff spends so much time currently with things relating to IPv4. Albert Erdmann Network Administrator Paradise On Line Inc. On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, Fernando Frediani wrote: > On 22/09/2021 03:49, Noah wrote: > <clip> > > So they choose to lease, and address holders are happy to monetize > their holdings while they appreciate in value. > > > By address holders you mean LIR. So what you are saying is that some > LIR out there who requested for IPv4 based on need from ARIN, are holding the > addresses which they no longer need artificially? So that they can lease to > small WISP? > > So that the purpose for which those LIR obtained the addresses in the > first place? > > Suppose the addresses those LIR are holding with no intension to use > them, were still under ARIN management, dont you think the new small WISP > would have better off being served by ARIN as new needs arise.? > > If LIR dont pay ARIN lots of money, why not return the idle addresses to ARIN > so that those with genuine need can be served. > > > That's the whole point I have been saying about the absurd IP leasing is. > > It is quiet logical these organizations to be better off served by > ARIN than a third party who probably doesn't even have justification to hold > those addresses anymore. So either transfer them to someone who justify them > or return them to ARIN so it can fullfil its mission by assigning directly > to this organization. > > Fernando > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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. > > > _______________________________________________ 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.
