> On Sep 23, 2021, at 21:40 , William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 8:35 PM David Farmer wrote:
>> maybe you could go back to my original question and comment on the examples
>> I provided.
>
> Hi David,
>
> I can try, but bear in mind my viewpoint doesn't necessarily follow
>
No worries, I think I was clear about it being speculation on my part.
Regardless of how you acquire the addresses, I think my point stands about
the fact that for the most part, leasing is making addresses available that
probably
wouldn’t make it to the transfer market.
Owen
> On Sep 23,
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 8:35 PM David Farmer wrote:
> maybe you could go back to my original question and comment on the examples
> I provided.
Hi David,
I can try, but bear in mind my viewpoint doesn't necessarily follow
your dividing lines. Indeed, I'm reasonably confident it does not.
>
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 17:53 William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:41 PM David Farmer via ARIN-PPML
> wrote:
> > I have a question for those that oppose the leasing or loaning of IPv4
> addresses to other entities absent connectivity; Is it the rent-paying or
> that lack of
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 5:54 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 23, 2021, at 16:25 , William Herrin wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:15 PM Mike Burns wrote:
> >> I add value by transferring cash to somebody else in the hope I can lease
> >> the purchased IPv4 out for a profit
Sorry, not for the list, can I retract that?
My apologies.
Regards,
Mike
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 21:05:45 -0400 Mike Burns wrote
Hi Owen,
Actually I don't approach address owners in any way.
I rely on incoming business.
I was always afraid of being accused of mining Whois
Hi Owen,
Actually I don't approach address owners in any way.
I rely on incoming business.
I was always afraid of being accused of mining Whois for commercial reasons.
Imagine my naivete!
Regards,
Mike
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 20:54:08 -0400 Owen DeLong wrote
> On Sep
Wrong again Bill.
What can't you understand about purchasing addresses at fair market price?
How is that rent-controlled, please elaborate?
Actually the current policy is rent-control!
Are you not understanding that these are not free pool addresses?
Regards,
Mike
On Thu, 23
> On Sep 23, 2021, at 16:25 , William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:15 PM Mike Burns wrote:
>> I add value by transferring cash to somebody else in the hope I can lease
>> the purchased IPv4 out for a profit before China and the DoD dump addresses
>> on the market.
>
> Hi
+1
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, William Herrin wrote:
Give it up Mike. You want to sublet a rent controlled apartment at
market rate. That's not cool.
-Bill
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:40 PM Mike Burns wrote:
Hello list,
It might help everybody to know that at current rates, it could take 100
Give it up Mike. You want to sublet a rent controlled apartment at
market rate. That's not cool.
-Bill
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:40 PM Mike Burns wrote:
>
> Hello list,
>
> It might help everybody to know that at current rates, it could take 100
> months of lease revenue to purchase an
> On Sep 23, 2021, at 15:49 , William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:41 PM David Farmer via ARIN-PPML
> wrote:
>> I have a question for those that oppose the leasing or loaning of IPv4
>> addresses to other entities absent connectivity; Is it the rent-paying or
>> that lack of
Hello list,
It might help everybody to know that at current rates, it could take 100 months
of lease revenue to purchase an address.
The risk is not exactly zero when buying to lease out.
Regards,
Mike
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 19:27:53 -0400 Mike Burns wrote
Hi Bill,
Hi Bill,
Wrong.
Arin processes a purchase of address.
I turn around and lease them for a fraction of that amount.
I add accessiblity and affordability for the lessees, or there is no market.
It's as simple as a bank financing a pickup truck.
Is the bank guilty of rent-seeking?
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:15 PM Mike Burns wrote:
> I add value by transferring cash to somebody else in the hope I can lease the
> purchased IPv4 out for a profit before China and the DoD dump addresses on
> the market.
Hi Mike,
ARIN leases addresses to you. You turn around and lease them to
Hi Bill,
You are completely neglecting risk in your assumption that no value is added.
I add value by transferring cash to somebody else in the hope I can lease the
purchased IPv4 out for a profit before China and the DoD dump addresses on the
market.
It's basic economics. Does an apartment
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:41 PM David Farmer via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
> I have a question for those that oppose the leasing or loaning of IPv4
> addresses to other entities absent connectivity; Is it the rent-paying or
> that lack of connectivity provided with the addresses that offend you? Or,
>
First, I do not support this policy as written. However, I do support
allowing leasing or loaning of IPv4 address space independent of providing
connectivity, and probably allowing leasing or loaning of addresses as
justification for at least the transfer of additional addresses, through
purchase
However I see policies getting made that cause a great conflict of Interest.
From: "John Curran"
To: "Owen DeLong"
Cc: "arin-ppml"
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 6:13:11 AM
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Proposal to ban Leasing of IP Addresses in the ARIN
region
Owen -
I do not
Hi Bill and Joe,
This is why my proposal doesn't change the relationship between ARIN and LIRs,
who have the same responsibility of ensuring need that LIRs always have.
Just absent the circuit itself, which doesn't change the justification data.
Regards,
Mike
On Thu, 23 Sep
Owen -
I do not decide the US antitrust laws, but rather find that I simply must be
aware of them and attend to their obligations in the operation of ARIN.
Do NOT engage in discussion of customer terms/conditions/pricing.
If you wish to engage in discussion of registry policy requirements and
The ONLY antitrust issue I see being expressed in the discussion that we
have been having is that of ARIN.
ARIN has specifically positioned itself as THE source of internet
addresses within its region. That itself looks like a classic antitrust
issue by itself. Even LIR's are required to
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:40 PM Joe Maimon wrote:
> Delegating
> ARIN's role to LIR's absent technical needs would have to be on the
> basis that it somehow improves IPv4 stewardship in a manner more
> efficient and in-line with community goals and consensus. I think that
> would be a high bar
Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML wrote:
Mike’s proposal expands trade and therefore can’t be construed as restraint of
trade… The real question is if banning leasing in all forms is restraint of
trade, why isn’t the current policy also restraint of trade?
Owen
Owen,
This proposal is a strawman
24 matches
Mail list logo
