Are you saying this thread may be stricken from the archives? I think that 
would be a travesty and unwarranted.

Owen


> On Sep 22, 2021, at 10:58 , John Sweeting <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Fernando and others,
>  
> Please use the thread for 2021-06 for discussing opinions on leasing as this 
> proposal will not be accepted as valid and therefore we might lose any 
> comments posted in this thread.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> John Sweeting
> CCO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>  
> From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Fernando Frediani 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> Date: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 1:55 PM
> To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Proposal to ban Leasing of IP Addresses in the ARIN 
> region
>  
> Hi John
> 
> I don't think anyone discussing this thread is much concerned about pricing 
> of services between ARIN participants and their customers really. I am 
> personally not. The confusion may have come from the way Owen have put the 
> text of this proposal.
> What we are discussing so far is only about a proposal to have an appropriate 
> language to ban Leasing of IP Addresses by LIRs.
> 
> Hope this helps to clarify
> 
> Regards
> Fernando
> 
> Em 22/09/2021 14:48, John Curran escreveu:
> Fernando - 
>  
> Michael was 100% correct - do not engage in discussions of pricing or other 
> terms of service between ARIN participants and their customers. Doing so is 
> prohibited by US antitrust law and ARIN will not be a party to facilitating 
> such discussions.
>  
> Participants who attempt to violate applicable law in this manner will be 
> expressly removed from ARIN mailing lists in order to protect the remainder 
> of the community that is able to participate properly.
> 
> Thanks,
> /John
>  
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
> 
> 
> On Sep 22, 2021, at 12:12 PM, 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] <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] <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]).
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.

Reply via email to