John -
Can you provide a brief explanation of why you believe this potential
change to policy is not desirable?
(I have no particular view either way, but having some explanation of
support / opposition viewpoints aids others in their consideration of the
merits/concerns with
It sounds to me like another attempt to get around recipients needing an
operational requirement to obtain resources. In other words, yet another
attempt to privatize public resources and charge people for access without
providing any sort of services to justify those charges.
If the
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 06:23:27PM -0500, Mike Burns wrote:
[snip]
> For point B, this policy provides the same opportunities that
> ARIN has always provided its ISP customers, to temporarily sub-assign
> networks to its clients.
> The only difference is these clients would not be part of the
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:24 PM ARIN wrote:
> * ARIN-2021-6: Permit IPv4 Leased Addresses for Purposes of Determining
> Utilization for Future Allocations
I continue to OPPOSE this proposal because:
A) It asks ARIN to facilitate blatant and unapologetic rent-seeking
behavior with changes to
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 3:23 PM Mike Burns wrote:
> Is rent always and everywhere a bad thing?
Hi Mike,
Just a clarification: "rent-seeking behavior" is a socio-economic term
that is at best loosely related to leasing things. For anyone not
familiar with the term, I ask you to google it. The
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 3:42 PM William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 3:23 PM Mike Burns wrote:
> > Is rent always and everywhere a bad thing?
> Just a clarification: "rent-seeking behavior" is a socio-economic term
> that is at best loosely related to leasing things. For anyone not
Hi Bill,
Thanks for your reasoning.
For point A I would say the cart has left the barn and these once public
resources are now effectively private resources, with different rules logically
applying.
Is rent always and everywhere a bad thing? We can't ignore the fact that these
resources
