There is but one stream from which to drink, which belongs to everyone.
We simply ensure that the weakest may also drink, by preventing the
strong from damming the stream, and claiming all the water to be theirs.
On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, Lu Heng wrote:
Taking out the market and middle man, have one central body distribute all
resources and reclaim them when not needed.
Wasn’t humanity spend entire 20 century with millions life dead to proof it
won’t work?
<[email protected]>于2021年9月3日 周五下午12:03写道：
+1
Agreed. The middleman with no infrastructure business model is
by
it's very nature parasitic.
Scott
On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, Fernando Frediani wrote:
>
> Surely people benefiting from IP leasing will keep trying to
make it
> 'normal', acceptable and part of day by day as if these
middleman were
> facilitating something for the good of the internet while it
is the
> opposite.
> This practice serves exclusively to the financial benefit of
those who lease
> (but are not building any Internet Infrastructure) and of
course to the
> middleman not the lessee.
>
> How can it be beneficial to lessee that has to pay more they
would have to
> spend if those very same resources were recovered by the RIR
and
> re-distributed directly to that same organization ?
>
> It doesn't matter much how the scenario changed in the past
and recent
> years. There are principles and fairness to be observed and
they should not
> change in order to adjust the interest of these few ones who
speculate a
> resource that doesn't belong to them and wasn't justified for
that propose.
> It is just easier the RIR to recover them and do the right
thing, for harder
> and stressful it can be it is the right thing to be done.
>
> I don't mean to sound rude to those who disagree with me, but
I really hope
> RIRs in general revoke as much as possible addresses clearly
being used for
> leasing where the resource holder only speculates them,
doesn't build any
> Internet infrastructure and where in many cases don't even
exist
> connectivity between the current resource holder and the
lessee and
> re-allocate them to those who truly justify. This has nothing
to do with
> interfere in the business of that resource holder.
>
> Often those supporting this misuse of IP resources try to
paint a picture
> that those resources are organization's property and the RIR
should be
> unable to do anything about that. Not being a irrevocable
properly
> organizations own explanations and clarity about how they use
it according
> to the what is in the best interest of all those who developed
and agreed
> the current rules in place and the organization who has the
duty to inspect
> that. Regardless the commercial model of an organization it
must adhere to
> the current rules and contract they previously signed, not the
other way
> round.
>
> Also the understanding that a LIR leases IP addresses is quiet
wrong. If
> they are build Internet infrastructure, provide connectivity
and charge
> administrative fees for the addresses they allocate to that
customer there
> is nothing wrong with it.
> I personally can understand the permanent Transfer of
resources and that has
> been a more natural and fair movement and why community agreed
on that on
> most RIRs, but despite some beautiful picture painted IP
leasing brings no
> good to lessee and to the Internet if things can be done in
the proper way.
>
> Regards
> Fernando
>
> On 02/09/2021 17:39, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
> In message <[email protected]>,
> "Mike Burns" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> We tried the method you've espoused below for thirty years and
> the result were a huge amount of wasted address space. Once
the market
> was adopted, many of those addresses found a useful place in
the routing
> table.
>
> Well, it's sort of a Catch-22. Mike, you're absolutely right
that once
> there was a free market, a lot of stuff came off the shelves
and started
> to be used productively. But can any of us say with
confidence that once
> there was a free market, a lot of this commodity (IPv4) that
was sitting
> on shelves didn't just stay there -because- of the open and
free market...
> because the "owners" of those blocks effectively became
speculators, just
> waiting arond for the scarcity to become more acute, and for
the price to
> go up?
>
> (I confess that I never in my life took an economics class,
but it seems
> to me that the entire field is chock full of head-scratching
conundrums
> like this... situation where you are damned if you do and
damned if you
> don't.)
>
> The free pool era is dying, let's put a fork in it as quickly
as
> possible We've seen the corruption engendered by the bait of
the
> free pool in multiple registries now, including our own.
>
> Just curious Mike... Does this opinion on your part extend
also to IPv6?
>
> Your old-fashioned method of address distribution would get
some
> addresses to those in need, I will concede that. However, so
will
> leasing addresses, with that demonstration of need being the
lease
> payment. Will you concede that those who pay to lease
addresses need
> them?
>
> Even if nobody else does, I certainly will. But of course
that's not the
> only issue.
>
> The current Cloud Innovation v. AFRINIC thing is in some ways
confusing as
> hell because it has brought to a head -multiple- long-standing
issues that
> have then gotten all tangled up with one another, making it
difficult for
> anybody to tease apart the various separate issues.
>
> One of these is what might be called "equity", i.e. the social
desire to
> help Africa, a continent and a people who have been on the
receiving end
> of so much exploitation and malevolent evil, over the
centuries, at the
> hands of others.
>
> Another issue is the right and proper role of RIRs.
>
> Last but not leas (and perhaps the most troubling and most
difficult to
> crack open in a way that does not merely reveal our individual
biases) is
> the question of the proper role of what I will just call
"speculators"
> within any free market.
>
> Contrary to what some might say, I think that when it comes to
IPv4 addresse
> s
> at least, it most certainly -is- possible to distinguish
"speculators" from
> actual and legitimate end users and/or legitimate brokers &
middlemen such
> as yourself. As I understand it, the current system requires
people to
> document their equipment purchases. No equipment purchases?
You're almost
> certainly just a speculator.
>
> So then the question becomes two-fold: (1) Do we want
speculators in this
> marketplace? and (2) Is there any actually feasible way to
keep them out
> of the "free" market even if the collective "we" firmly
decided that we
> wanted to do so?
>
> I personally don't have answers to any of these questions. I
would only
> offer up the observation that I am aware of at least a few
speculators at
> this moment in time, and it would be an understatement for me
to say that
> their actions seem to me to be both glaringly untoward and
also unhelpful.
> But if you ask me IN GENERAL whether "speculators" are a
necessary and even
> useful component of a free market, I cannot say they are not.
And it seems
> I may not be alone in leaving open this possibility:
>
>https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/07/09/the-theranos-implosion-
a
> nd-robert-shiller-on-short-selling-and-complete-markets/
>
> Regards,
> rfg
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
--
--
Kind regards.
Lu
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
