"Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Sat Feb 5 10:22:21 CST 2011


On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 12:40:44PM +0000, John Curran wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2011, at 5:57 AM, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> >> For the ARIN region, it would be nice to know how you'd like ARIN perform
> >> in the presence of such activity ("leasing" IP addresses by ISP not providing
> >> connectivity).  It's possible that such is perfectly reasonable and to simply
> >> be ignored, it's also possible that such should be considered a fraudulent 
> >> transfer and the resources reclaimed.  At the end of the day, the policy is
> >> set by this community, and clarity over ambiguity is very helpful.
> >> ...
> > 
> >    the practice predates ARIN by many years...  FWIW...
> 
> Good to know; it makes its omission from RFC2050 even more significant and 
> highlights the need for clear policy in this area.  Ultimately, the question
> is simply how the operator community wishes to have this treated, and there
> should be alignment between that consensus and the number resource policy. 
> 
> /John

	as you pointed out back in oh, IETF-29, actual network operators 
	don't participate much in the standards setting process so its
	no wonder RFC 2050 has (several) "blind-spots" when it comes to 
	operational reality.

	and pragmatically, I am not sure that one could come to a single
	consistent suite of polciy for management of number resource. there's
	just too many ways (some conflicting) to use them.  but this might be
	a sigma-six outlying POV.  ARIN's community certinly is dominated by
	a particular type of network operator.

--bill




More information about the NANOG mailing list