On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 10:47 AM jordi.palet--- via SIG-policy < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Noah, > > I will agree that the most honest thing to do is to return the space that > you don’t need to the corresponding RIR, and this is the reason I was since > day 1, personally opposed to any kind of transfers. However, my view is not > important, but the community one and that means that having “regulated” > ways to do things instead of operations “under the table” is the right way > to go. > Hi Jordi Let us not use the excuse of doing things "under the table" to push proposals that are not warranted. The RIR's have mechanisms in place to deal with any issues of violation of policy. If you know of any under the table situation, it's best you inform the RIR. > > Now, you’re wrong regarding the support of “leasing” in ARIN and RIPE NCC, > as indicated in the proposal: > > 3. Situation in other regions > ------------------------------ > As far as we know, only in RIPE NCC temporary transfers are allowed. > > It was not necessary to have such a requirement in place since its a known practise that LIR have traditionally assigned and/or sub-allocated address space to end users as part of connectivity internet services or hosted services with a contract of such services. At the same time, RIPE NCC does not contemplate leasing, but it does not explicitly prohibit it either. > > The premise that when something is not explicitly prohibited therefore its allow is flawed. This is what you are trying to imply. Please remember that there are mechanisms in place to deal with violations of existing allocation policies. If an LIR was allocated address space based-on need to use them to provide services to the public and they are instead leasing it or renting it, the RIR ought to deal with such violation. AFRINIC has indicated this even in recent times through a post here https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-February/003907.html In AFRINIC and LACNIC, neither leasing nor temporary transfers are contemplated. However, an equivalent proposal has been submitted in LACNIC. > > Temporary transfers are not contemplated in ARIN, and leasing is not a valid > justification of the need. When leasing addresses, no more addresses can be > requested. Additionally, certain blocks cannot be leased. > > I will encourage you to drop those proposals. Let us not legitimize leasing of address space through the so called subtle "temporary transfers" because RIPE somehow allowed such a practice. Also, in LACNIC there are 2 proposals being discussed in the same direction. > It seems to me that folks went out of their way to stockpile IPv4 addresses so as to create an artificial scarcity and depletion of IPv4 so that they can monetize the addresses in the future through subtle policies. There was time, a decade ago, when everyone was singing, lets us go IPv6, lets us all adopt IPv6, there will be no more IPv4 address by 2020, little did the community know what there was lots of IPv4 address space stockpiled to create a global artificial scarcity and an apparent depletion so as to create a market for IPv$ as a commodities. The Internet community was played. > Regards, > Jordi > Cheers, *.**/noah*
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
