So rent-seeking and price gouging are fine as long as they come from someone that also provides you a circuit. Got it.
Thanks for that clarification. Owen > On Sep 22, 2021, at 09:38 , Chris Woodfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > Fernando - I would support language similar to what you’ve proposed, as it > explicitly requires the address allocation to be part of a connectivity > service. > > The trick then would be to make sure organizations can’t do it the other way > around; I’m reminded of a nightclub I used to frequent that held a restaurant > license, which only allowed them to serve alcohol as part of a order for > food. As such, customers did not order drinks, they would buy a packet of > peanuts that happened to be served with an alcoholic beverage alongside. > > Let’s make sure that with this language, we don’t suddenly see an influx of > “VPN Providers” who happen to be routing /24 or larger blocks to each of > their customer’s tunnels. > > Thanks, > > -Chris > >> On Sep 22, 2021, at 9:12 AM, Fernando Frediani <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I believe maybe Michael didn't understand well the matter fully or got only >> part of it. >> Probably what caused more confusion was how Owen put the part "No signatory >> to any ARIN RSA is permitted by policy to engage in a recurring charge for >> addresses or a differentiated service charge based on the number if >> addresses issued to a customer.". That could be dubious in the sense that a >> LIR could not charge administrative fees when they assign addresses to their >> connectivity customers. >> >> A simple: "No signatory to any ARIN RSA is permitted by policy to engage >> issuing addresses to non-conectivity customers. Addresses must be provided >> strictly as part of a contract for connectivity services." >> >> I think Owen tried to put in a way to strengthen his point of view the LIR >> lease addresses and by that text they would not permitted to do even for >> connectivity customers.Simplifying it would achieve the objective in the >> subject without necessarily change the usual way LIRs allocate addresses to >> their *connectivity customers*. >> >> Regards >> Fernando >> >> On 22/09/2021 13:00, Isaiah Olson wrote: >>> Hi Michael, >>> >>> I appreciate you clarifying this issue. If this policy proposal is >>> considered out of scope, I would ask why Mike's policy proposal to >>> explicitly allow leasing is considered in-scope for this PDP? If it is >>> ARIN's position that it "does not impose any such restrictions on trade or >>> pricing" with regards to pricing structure, why does ARIN differentiate >>> justified need for transfers (trade) based on the absence or presence of >>> connectivity services? >>> >>> I am happy to dispatch with any discussions that are not relevant or >>> allowed, but I think that your post requires additional clarification of >>> what topics are not permissible since many of the issues you have raised as >>> out of scope are germane to other policies under discussion. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Isaiah >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> >>> Please contact [email protected] <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> <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.
_______________________________________________ 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.
