Assigned is still leased in one form or another unless that assignment is portable and the customer can take it with them when they leave the carrier I. Question. That’s not generally the case.
Owen I know a lot of end-users who went to the RIR to ask for /24 assignments.
I also know customers who are assigned /24 by their connectivity providers. The key word is assigned not leased. Infact they often have to justify to their connectivity providers why they need a /24 assigned above and beyond the /30 or /31 that enables the services between the customer and their providers.
Owen, it's not leasing. Its assignment since an LIR is mandated to do so to end users.
On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 8:10 AM Owen DeLong via SIG-policy < [email protected]> wrote: There are many customers that have a /24 or more leased from their provider. Claiming that anyone needing a /24 or shorter prefix must go to an RIR or the market is current reality, but not historically true. Lots of older provider assignments of /24 and shorter prefixes exist in the wild and persist in use today.
Owen
> On Aug 12, 2023, at 05:12, Christopher H <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Team,
>
> I am in support of the concept, however I believe some policy wording changes need to be made, in order to ensure that it does not impact members who have a legitimate business case for leasing IP addresses.
>
> There are businesses who do lease IP resources as part of a service, for example, businesses may also lease subnets smaller than a /24 to customers who may have a business internet service. In circumstances where a resource user requires greater than a /25 (i.e. a /24 or larger) they either need to acquire resources directly from APNIC or through a market transfer. I don't believe it is the intention of this policy to restrict these types of services however under the current wording would technically be in breach of the policy.
>
> The policy needs to be worded in a way, that prevents members from leasing IP resources themselves as the only service, without any other services (such as transit) from being supplied. This is generally what organisations may do when they hold resources they no longer require or obtain resources from the registry with the sole intention of leasing them, and provide false or misleading information to acquire them.
>
> Should APNIC make a determination that a resource holder is leasing out resources in breach of this policy, then the resource holder needs to either transfer the resources directly to the lessee or return the resources back to APNIC for further delegations to other members/applicants.
>
> Regards,
> Christopher H.
> _______________________________________________
> SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
|
_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
