Orbit

Hi Vivek,

There is such a thing as a lease-to-own transfer, which ends up as a transfer. And there are those who might be considering transfer versus lease, and that definitely comports with the Charter for this list, which requires “topics relevant to IPv4 transfers”.

Everything you wrote below is true and factual but deftly elides the meaningful point, which is that leasing is not prohibited at APNIC.

(Although leased-out addresses would not count towards justifying a new purchase.)

If I am wrong, please let us know by telling us what law, policy or contract term with APNIC would be violated by an APNIC resource holder leasing blocks to non-connected customers. And would that subject them to revocation risk?

Thanks and regards,

Mike Burns

IPTrading.com

From: Vivek Nigam vivek@apnic.net Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2022 9:34 PM To: Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com; mailman_apnic-transfers apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease

Hi Raquel,

APNIC policy does not have any provisions for leasing of IP addresses on their own. There was a policy proposal for temporary transfer prop-119 but it did not reach consensus and was withdrawn by the author.

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-119

APNIC Members can delegate address space to their downstream customers, which are operating networks. Such delegations are non-portable and must be returned to the Member if the downstream customer ceases to receive connectivity from the Member.

We have a transfer policy which allows the transfer of unused IPv4 address between APNIC Members as well as other RIR members. For more information, see

https://www.apnic.net/transfer

Please note the IPv4 transfers mailing list is only for the discussion of transfers, not leasing.

APNIC Transfers Charter:

The APNIC Transfer mailing list was created to provide a forum enabling the sources and recipients of IPv4 address transfers, as well as IPv4 brokers, to discuss topics relevant to IPv4 transfers.

Hope this information helps.

Regards,

Vivek

From: Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com mailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com > Date: Saturday, 4 June 2022 at 8:49 am To: mailman_apnic-transfers <apnic-transfers@apnic.net mailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net > Subject: [apnic-transfers] /16 Lease

Hello all,

We have a clean /16 available for lease….

Please let us know if you have any interest 😊

IPv4 Vault LLC Raquel Wellington Asset Recovery Specialist +1 (424) 258-4758 mailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com

The fact of the matter is, why are leases and auctions even a thing?

If you don’t need the resource anymore, doing the right thing and handing it back allows companies like myself to be able to continue operating and pushes further the move to IPv6.

We simply don’t have the funds to participate in auctions and frankly, we shouldn’t have too.

It is a failure of NIC’ registrars around the world that they’ve forgone the push to IPv6 and instead made a pay-to-play, everyone for themselves environment where only the wealthy and large carriers can play.

The fact that companies like IPv4-Auctions, IPv4-Vault, IPTrading, etc even exist underscore just how disgusting this system has become.

APNIC and all the other registrars should be ashamed of themselves.

Kind Regards, Karl Kloppenborg.

From: Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 5:37 am To: Mike Burns mike@iptrading.com, 'Vivek Nigam' vivek@apnic.net, 'mailman_apnic-transfers' apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Thank you Mike and Vivek for the points made.

Vivek – why is there such a concern with a lease conversation? Some members are unable to perform a transfer due to lack of budgets, so lease might be their only option…

Is there a mailing list where we can post about lease?

And does the transfer mailing list allow post about selling IPs, since that is directly related to a transfer?

From: Mike Burns mike@iptrading.com Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 at 7:48 AM To: 'Vivek Nigam' vivek@apnic.net, Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com, 'mailman_apnic-transfers' apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: RE: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Hi Vivek,

There is such a thing as a lease-to-own transfer, which ends up as a transfer. And there are those who might be considering transfer versus lease, and that definitely comports with the Charter for this list, which requires “topics relevant to IPv4 transfers”.

Everything you wrote below is true and factual but deftly elides the meaningful point, which is that leasing is not prohibited at APNIC. (Although leased-out addresses would not count towards justifying a new purchase.)

If I am wrong, please let us know by telling us what law, policy or contract term with APNIC would be violated by an APNIC resource holder leasing blocks to non-connected customers. And would that subject them to revocation risk?

Thanks and regards,

Mike Burns IPTrading.com

From: Vivek Nigam vivek@apnic.net Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2022 9:34 PM To: Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com; mailman_apnic-transfers apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease

Hi Raquel,

APNIC policy does not have any provisions for leasing of IP addresses on their own. There was a policy proposal for temporary transfer prop-119 but it did not reach consensus and was withdrawn by the author.

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-119https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Fcommunity%2Fpolicy%2Fproposals%2Fprop-119&data=05%7C01%7Craquel.w%40ipv4-vault.com%7C52058c09a653455d719108da47cb9876%7Cfa870da71cfb45caa9e9748210ded801%7C0%7C0%7C637901237023307347%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=mm4P7xHdiKYn%2FD9t%2FmhcnZ%2Foja2jP39gV6OLeMtGIs8%3D&reserved=0

APNIC Members can delegate address space to their downstream customers, which are operating networks. Such delegations are non-portable and must be returned to the Member if the downstream customer ceases to receive connectivity from the Member.

We have a transfer policy which allows the transfer of unused IPv4 address between APNIC Members as well as other RIR members. For more information, see

https://www.apnic.net/transferhttps://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Ftransfer&data=05%7C01%7Craquel.w%40ipv4-vault.com%7C52058c09a653455d719108da47cb9876%7Cfa870da71cfb45caa9e9748210ded801%7C0%7C0%7C637901237023307347%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=J9yreL7wCx9RBnu1rQzVb6L5%2FEcjBTJ6dUSqe%2Bhs%2BeQ%3D&reserved=0

Please note the IPv4 transfers mailing list is only for the discussion of transfers, not leasing.

APNIC Transfers Charter: The APNIC Transfer mailing list was created to provide a forum enabling the sources and recipients of IPv4 address transfers, as well as IPv4 brokers, to discuss topics relevant to IPv4 transfers.

Hope this information helps.

Regards, Vivek

From: Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com> Date: Saturday, 4 June 2022 at 8:49 am To: mailman_apnic-transfers <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: [apnic-transfers] /16 Lease Hello all,

We have a clean /16 available for lease….

Please let us know if you have any interest 😊

IPv4 Vault LLC Raquel Wellington Asset Recovery Specialist +1 (424) 258-4758 raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com

Hi Mike and all, APNIC delegates IP addresses to Members based on their demonstrated need. What Members can do with that address space once it is no longer needed is impacted by policy requirements. I will provide two examples. Example 1: Addresses delegated from the last /8 pool cannot be transferred for a minimum of five years. During that time, if the reason for the original request is no longer valid, the resources must be returned to APNIC. https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#8.0.-IPv4-Transfers https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#4.0.-Resource-License So in this instance, if a Member leases out their IP addresses within five years of receiving the delegation from APNIC, they are clearly not needed for their original declared purpose and must be returned to APNIC. Example 2: For addresses delegated to a Member more than five years ago, if a Member no longer has the need for the address space, APNIC policy says the Member can choose to transfer it to another organization or return it to APNIC. APNIC policy does not have provisions for leasing. So in the second example, APNIC Members leasing addresses would be doing so outside the policy framework and will not receive APNIC services such as whois registration and RPKI/ROA access related to those addresses. This in turn may make it difficult to freely utilise those addresses on the Internet, due to lack of clear authorisation and a reliance on the registered holder (lessor) to assist. Of course, if the addresses being leased were not delegated by APNIC, then the relevant RIR’s policies apply to those addresses.

If the community wishes to change APNIC address policy to either include or clarify provisions for leasing, proposals can be submitted to the Policy SIG for community discussion. Thanks Vivek

From: Gaurav Kansal gaurav.kansal@nic.in Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 1:26 pm To: Karl Kloppenborg karl@rapidwireless.com.au Cc: raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com, Vivek Nigam vivek@apnic.net, mailman_apnic-transfers apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: Re: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Hi Karl,

Totally agrees on your words. At least APNIC should not promote IPv4 auctions, leases and all other dirty stuff.

Why can’t we have a policy in APNIC to not to allow IPV4 auctions/leases and only allow transfers after proper scrutiny.

But money can do anything and i am doubtful whether apnic will even agrees on our points.

Thanks Gaurav Kansal

On 08-Jun-2022, at 08:50, apnic-transfers@apnic.net wrote:  The fact of the matter is, why are leases and auctions even a thing?

If you don’t need the resource anymore, doing the right thing and handing it back allows companies like myself to be able to continue operating and pushes further the move to IPv6.

We simply don’t have the funds to participate in auctions and frankly, we shouldn’t have too.

It is a failure of NIC’ registrars around the world that they’ve forgone the push to IPv6 and instead made a pay-to-play, everyone for themselves environment where only the wealthy and large carriers can play.

The fact that companies like IPv4-Auctions, IPv4-Vault, IPTrading, etc even exist underscore just how disgusting this system has become.

APNIC and all the other registrars should be ashamed of themselves.

Kind Regards, Karl Kloppenborg.

From: Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 5:37 am To: Mike Burns mike@iptrading.com, 'Vivek Nigam' vivek@apnic.net, 'mailman_apnic-transfers' apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Thank you Mike and Vivek for the points made.

Vivek – why is there such a concern with a lease conversation? Some members are unable to perform a transfer due to lack of budgets, so lease might be their only option…

Is there a mailing list where we can post about lease?

And does the transfer mailing list allow post about selling IPs, since that is directly related to a transfer?

From: Mike Burns mike@iptrading.com Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 at 7:48 AM To: 'Vivek Nigam' vivek@apnic.net, Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com, 'mailman_apnic-transfers' apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: RE: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Hi Vivek,

There is such a thing as a lease-to-own transfer, which ends up as a transfer. And there are those who might be considering transfer versus lease, and that definitely comports with the Charter for this list, which requires “topics relevant to IPv4 transfers”.

Everything you wrote below is true and factual but deftly elides the meaningful point, which is that leasing is not prohibited at APNIC. (Although leased-out addresses would not count towards justifying a new purchase.)

If I am wrong, please let us know by telling us what law, policy or contract term with APNIC would be violated by an APNIC resource holder leasing blocks to non-connected customers. And would that subject them to revocation risk?

Thanks and regards,

Mike Burns IPTrading.com

From: Vivek Nigam vivek@apnic.net Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2022 9:34 PM To: Raquel Wellington raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com; mailman_apnic-transfers apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease

Hi Raquel,

APNIC policy does not have any provisions for leasing of IP addresses on their own. There was a policy proposal for temporary transfer prop-119 but it did not reach consensus and was withdrawn by the author.

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-119https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Fcommunity%2Fpolicy%2Fproposals%2Fprop-119&data=05%7C01%7C%7C78ff1255fda04b959e3908da48feb998%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902556135004948%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=UwtW2dwN8T%2BOGnRtQd%2Bo2npfII3NzaC3kc25ogC%2F%2F2w%3D&reserved=0

APNIC Members can delegate address space to their downstream customers, which are operating networks. Such delegations are non-portable and must be returned to the Member if the downstream customer ceases to receive connectivity from the Member.

We have a transfer policy which allows the transfer of unused IPv4 address between APNIC Members as well as other RIR members. For more information, see

https://www.apnic.net/transferhttps://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Ftransfer&data=05%7C01%7C%7C78ff1255fda04b959e3908da48feb998%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902556135004948%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kFWVdXMlwQgLq7JX%2BbfVjb9hbwExRDYO8gRhf3DaLxo%3D&reserved=0

Please note the IPv4 transfers mailing list is only for the discussion of transfers, not leasing.

APNIC Transfers Charter: The APNIC Transfer mailing list was created to provide a forum enabling the sources and recipients of IPv4 address transfers, as well as IPv4 brokers, to discuss topics relevant to IPv4 transfers.

Hope this information helps.

Regards, Vivek

From: Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com> Date: Saturday, 4 June 2022 at 8:49 am To: mailman_apnic-transfers <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: [apnic-transfers] /16 Lease Hello all,

We have a clean /16 available for lease….

Please let us know if you have any interest 😊

IPv4 Vault LLC Raquel Wellington Asset Recovery Specialist +1 (424) 258-4758 raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com

_______________________________________________ apnic-transfers - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-transfers@apnic.net/ To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-transfers-leave@apnic.net

[https://email.gov.in/videos/images/75.jpg]https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famritmahotsav.nic.in%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C78ff1255fda04b959e3908da48feb998%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902556135004948%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=TXJZjUmIanTi5mA0SSqxUvkmxyZ%2Fs6ezW2jjb5rHvWw%3D&reserved=0

Gaurav,

On Jun 8, 2022, at 6:02 AM, Gaurav Kansal gaurav.kansal@nic.in wrote:

What karl and me are trying to say is why APNIC allowing the sale/purchase of IPs ?

My guess would be “because policy allows it and organizations want to buy/sell”.

In the present scenario, it’s nearly impossible for small organisations to get the IPs (here IPs means v4) to start any service. And on the other hand, giants are buying the IPs and dominating the industry.

While I sympathize with the situation you’re in, if I understand correctly, for a transfer to be recognized by APNIC, justified need must be demonstrated, regardless of whether the organization is “small" or “giant”. If APNIC were to (attempt to) disallow transfers and (somehow) force allocated but unused address space to be returned to them, wouldn’t the “giant” organizations simply obtain the address space though APNIC (at lower cost)?

What stopping APNIC to immediately stop this sale/purchase stuff.

Ignoring the need to revise policy (since you didn’t want to hear about it), there is always https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_tide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_tide: a market existed prior to the RIRs accepting their existence. If APINC were to attempt to magically stop the market, I suspect the (“giant") folks who need address space would find a way to get it and, in the process, reduce the relevance of APNIC.

Regards, -drc

Hi Gaurav,

As David said, transfers are allowed because policy allows it.

APNIC distributes and manages Internet resources in the region following the address policies that are proposed and agreed by the community. Prop-50: ‘IPv4 address transfers’ was first proposed in 2007, reached community consensus in 2009, and was implemented in 2010.

If you have a proposal to change APNIC address policy, you are welcome to submit a proposal to the Policy SIG for community discussion. I can recommend the following resources if you wish to learn more about the policy process and how it works:

Policy development: https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/process/

Guidelines for proposal authors: https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/process/guidelines-for-proposal-autho...

APNIC Academy’s Policy Development Process Course: https://academy.apnic.net/en/course/policy-development-process-course

Thanks Vivek

From: Gaurav Kansal gaurav.kansal@nic.in Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 11:02 pm To: Vivek Nigam vivek@apnic.net Cc: Karl Kloppenborg karl@rapidwireless.com.au, raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com, mailman_apnic-transfers apnic-transfers@apnic.net Subject: Re: [apnic-transfers] /16 Lease Hi Vivek,

What karl and me are trying to say is why APNIC allowing the sale/purchase of IPs ?

In the present scenario, it’s nearly impossible for small organisations to get the IPs (here IPs means v4) to start any service. And on the other hand, giants are buying the IPs and dominating the industry. What stopping APNIC to immediately stop this sale/purchase stuff. please don’t show me the policy path….. apnic has recently change one of its allocation policy without even informing the community. So APNIC can very well do this without even waiting for policy thing.

Thanks, Gaurav Kansal

On 08-Jun-2022, at 16:43, vivek@apnic.netmailto:vivek@apnic.net wrote:

Hi Mike and all, APNIC delegates IP addresses to Members based on their demonstrated need. What Members can do with that address space once it is no longer needed is impacted by policy requirements. I will provide two examples. Example 1: Addresses delegated from the last /8 pool cannot be transferred for a minimum of five years. During that time, if the reason for the original request is no longer valid, the resources must be returned to APNIC. https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#8.0.-IPv4-Transfers https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#4.0.-Resource-License So in this instance, if a Member leases out their IP addresses within five years of receiving the delegation from APNIC, they are clearly not needed for their original declared purpose and must be returned to APNIC. Example 2: For addresses delegated to a Member more than five years ago, if a Member no longer has the need for the address space, APNIC policy says the Member can choose to transfer it to another organization or return it to APNIC. APNIC policy does not have provisions for leasing. So in the second example, APNIC Members leasing addresses would be doing so outside the policy framework and will not receive APNIC services such as whois registration and RPKI/ROA access related to those addresses. This in turn may make it difficult to freely utilise those addresses on the Internet, due to lack of clear authorisation and a reliance on the registered holder (lessor) to assist. Of course, if the addresses being leased were not delegated by APNIC, then the relevant RIR’s policies apply to those addresses.

If the community wishes to change APNIC address policy to either include or clarify provisions for leasing, proposals can be submitted to the Policy SIG for community discussion. Thanks Vivek

From: Gaurav Kansal <gaurav.kansal@nic.inmailto:gaurav.kansal@nic.in> Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 1:26 pm To: Karl Kloppenborg <karl@rapidwireless.com.aumailto:karl@rapidwireless.com.au> Cc: raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com>, Vivek Nigam <vivek@apnic.netmailto:vivek@apnic.net>, mailman_apnic-transfers <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: Re: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Hi Karl,

Totally agrees on your words. At least APNIC should not promote IPv4 auctions, leases and all other dirty stuff.

Why can’t we have a policy in APNIC to not to allow IPV4 auctions/leases and only allow transfers after proper scrutiny.

But money can do anything and i am doubtful whether apnic will even agrees on our points.

Thanks Gaurav Kansal

On 08-Jun-2022, at 08:50, apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net wrote:  The fact of the matter is, why are leases and auctions even a thing?

If you don’t need the resource anymore, doing the right thing and handing it back allows companies like myself to be able to continue operating and pushes further the move to IPv6.

We simply don’t have the funds to participate in auctions and frankly, we shouldn’t have too.

It is a failure of NIC’ registrars around the world that they’ve forgone the push to IPv6 and instead made a pay-to-play, everyone for themselves environment where only the wealthy and large carriers can play.

The fact that companies like IPv4-Auctions, IPv4-Vault, IPTrading, etc even exist underscore just how disgusting this system has become.

APNIC and all the other registrars should be ashamed of themselves.

Kind Regards, Karl Kloppenborg.

From: Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com> Date: Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 5:37 am To: Mike Burns <mike@iptrading.commailto:mike@iptrading.com>, 'Vivek Nigam' <vivek@apnic.netmailto:vivek@apnic.net>, 'mailman_apnic-transfers' <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Thank you Mike and Vivek for the points made.

Vivek – why is there such a concern with a lease conversation? Some members are unable to perform a transfer due to lack of budgets, so lease might be their only option…

Is there a mailing list where we can post about lease?

And does the transfer mailing list allow post about selling IPs, since that is directly related to a transfer?

From: Mike Burns <mike@iptrading.commailto:mike@iptrading.com> Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 at 7:48 AM To: 'Vivek Nigam' <vivek@apnic.netmailto:vivek@apnic.net>, Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com>, 'mailman_apnic-transfers' <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: RE: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease Hi Vivek,

There is such a thing as a lease-to-own transfer, which ends up as a transfer. And there are those who might be considering transfer versus lease, and that definitely comports with the Charter for this list, which requires “topics relevant to IPv4 transfers”.

Everything you wrote below is true and factual but deftly elides the meaningful point, which is that leasing is not prohibited at APNIC. (Although leased-out addresses would not count towards justifying a new purchase.)

If I am wrong, please let us know by telling us what law, policy or contract term with APNIC would be violated by an APNIC resource holder leasing blocks to non-connected customers. And would that subject them to revocation risk?

Thanks and regards,

Mike Burns IPTrading.comhttps://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fiptrading.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cd39fdb30020c4ca3be6708da494f254b%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902901551005119%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=yRXMCqYZb5ndggyG9fjZhB668B2ZQ5xsU6fx97D3Rls%3D&reserved=0

From: Vivek Nigam <vivek@apnic.netmailto:vivek@apnic.net> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2022 9:34 PM To: Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com>; mailman_apnic-transfers <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: [apnic-transfers] Re: /16 Lease

Hi Raquel,

APNIC policy does not have any provisions for leasing of IP addresses on their own. There was a policy proposal for temporary transfer prop-119 but it did not reach consensus and was withdrawn by the author.

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-119https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Fcommunity%2Fpolicy%2Fproposals%2Fprop-119&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cd39fdb30020c4ca3be6708da494f254b%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902901551005119%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=8iLsHIKYMs5TcDafAcQWd6O1r2DIPAi%2Fh6h5H2rRoeE%3D&reserved=0

APNIC Members can delegate address space to their downstream customers, which are operating networks. Such delegations are non-portable and must be returned to the Member if the downstream customer ceases to receive connectivity from the Member.

We have a transfer policy which allows the transfer of unused IPv4 address between APNIC Members as well as other RIR members. For more information, see

https://www.apnic.net/transferhttps://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apnic.net%2Ftransfer&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cd39fdb30020c4ca3be6708da494f254b%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902901551005119%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=YzH3BhvwDPO391dJhqea7q9JtY9rf0y4uliahycT49E%3D&reserved=0

Please note the IPv4 transfers mailing list is only for the discussion of transfers, not leasing.

APNIC Transfers Charter: The APNIC Transfer mailing list was created to provide a forum enabling the sources and recipients of IPv4 address transfers, as well as IPv4 brokers, to discuss topics relevant to IPv4 transfers.

Hope this information helps.

Regards, Vivek

From: Raquel Wellington <raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com> Date: Saturday, 4 June 2022 at 8:49 am To: mailman_apnic-transfers <apnic-transfers@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers@apnic.net> Subject: [apnic-transfers] /16 Lease Hello all,

We have a clean /16 available for lease….

Please let us know if you have any interest 😊

IPv4 Vault LLC Raquel Wellington Asset Recovery Specialist +1 (424) 258-4758 raquel.w@ipv4-vault.commailto:raquel.w@ipv4-vault.com

_______________________________________________ apnic-transfers - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-transfers@apnic.net/ To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-transfers-leave@apnic.netmailto:apnic-transfers-leave@apnic.net

[https://email.gov.in/videos/images/75.jpg]https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famritmahotsav.nic.in%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cd39fdb30020c4ca3be6708da494f254b%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637902901551005119%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3vzHvKNcZfALwb5IQ19Rax%2BDTf0WoyIg4YSk7OJfZxQ%3D&reserved=0

Karl,

On Jun 7, 2022, at 8:19 PM, Karl Kloppenborg via apnic-transfers apnic-transfers@apnic.net wrote:

The fact of the matter is, why are leases and auctions even a thing?

I suspect leases are a thing for the same reason people rent apartments instead of buying houses: sometimes you don’t have the money to buy something outright and/or you do not anticipate your needs to be permanent. Auctions are a thing because a strong demand for IPv4 addresses remains and those that have allocated-but-unused IPv4 addresses want to maximize their profits when they sell their address space (for good or ill).

If you don’t need the resource anymore, doing the right thing and handing it back allows companies like myself to be able to continue operating

and pushes further the move to IPv6.

I’m unclear how returning allocated but unused IPv4 addresses to the RIRs for subsequent reallocation would “further the move to IPv6”.

We simply don’t have the funds to participate in auctions and frankly, we shouldn’t have too.

It is a failure of NIC’ registrars around the world that they’ve forgone the push to IPv6 and instead made a pay-to-play, everyone for themselves environment where only the wealthy and large carriers can play.

I would be _very_ surprised if the RIRs and/or NIRs (whom I presume you mean when you say “NIC’ registrars”) have stopped pushing IPv6. I suspect the opposite is the case.

The fact that companies like IPv4-Auctions, IPv4-Vault, IPTrading, etc even exist underscore just how disgusting this system has become.

I believe they, and the market that underlies them, are a natural outcome of the demand for IPv4 addresses overwhelming the supply. It is precisely because of the market that organizations that had obtained vast amounts of address space which has remained unused for decades are now making that address space available for use. If the market did not exist, I strongly suspect that address space would remain allocated but unused (what’s the incentive for anyone to go through the hassle of renumbering, cleaning, or even identifying inefficiently used address space?). That market also now provides very clear signals to organizations about the costs of staying with IPv4 versus the costs of migrating to IPv6, unhindered by the distortion caused by the RIRs and can provide funds to organizations who have allocated but unused address space to facilitate the transition to IPv6.

Is this ideal? Not in my mind, particularly for smaller players and new entrants. However, this outcome has been obvious for some time. That’s why the IETF started up the IPng effort.

Regards, -drc