On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, Lu Heng wrote:
<[email protected]>于2021年9月3日 周五下午1:12写道：
> No one is claiming anything here, everyone is paying a fair
market price for
> what they are using in a scare market. Owning an asset does
not constitute a
> crime.
Being allocated IP addresses from a RIR does not constitute
ownership of
an asset, under any circumstances.
Who decides this? All those asset purchase agreement wasn’t signed out of
blue.
Agreements made among men and women based on erroneous premises are no
more relevant that two people agreeing that the sky contains no stars;
either they are both blind, they are both fooling only themselves, or one
is dishonest, fooling the other, who is blind.
Number itself might not constitute asset. However registration in an unique
database surely is.
Said registration comes with responsibilites as well as rights. Consider
it more a position of trust to manage the assets ethically. Such a
position can be revoked, if that trust is broken.
> Just because you no longer get land for free from the west,
doesn’t
> mean anyone today leasing you a house in Bay Area evil.
Capitalism rewards
> those who come first, in any market.
Capitalism, from my experience, rewards many of the worst
qualities in
mankind; greed, selfishness, and profit over all things.
Unfettered, it
will be civilization's undoing, ecologically. Meanwhile, the
strong will
simply continue to steal from the weak, and claim themselves
pioneers.
That is an accusation without base. Rich must be stealing from the poor, a
perfect communist revolution quote.
Where you see accusation, I see only analysis from a lifetime of
observation and participation.
Most of market are started by pioneers—and some of them are become very rich
in the process—bill gates, Steve Jobs, for example.
I suggest that you should contemplate the film "The Pirates of Silicon
Valley" for a bit of historical perspective on these two figures. You may
find that you just proved my point.
You experience clearly is not shared in this society,
To which society do you refer?
which form of society
you are advocating?
What makes you assume I am advocating for anything? I was simply refuting
your point that capitalism rewards pioneers. Nikola Tesla, and a great
many other true pioneers might disagree with you, were they alive and here
to do so.
Capitalism can be flawed except it is the best mankind
have discover so far.
Perhaps, perhaps not. You are, however, entitled to your opinion. Be
aware that stating your opinion does not constitute fact.
>
>
> <[email protected]>于2021年9月3日 周五下午12:45写道：
> 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-implosi
o
> n-
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> --
> Kind regards.
> Lu
>
>
>
--
--
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.
