Re: IP range for lease

[Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

> On Jul 11, 2023, at 09:04, John Curran <jcurran () arin net> wrote:
>
>
> > On Jul 11, 2023, at 11:47 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> >
> > Actually, I couldn’t find anything in the NRPM which leads me to believe that there is any distinction in the 
> > documentation requirements for reassignment/reallocation regardless of associated connectivity. None of the policies 
> > seemed to specify this. As such, I would think that Connectivity Independent Leasing (CIL) and Connectivity Related 
> > Leasing (CRL) would be subject to exactly the same recording/reporting requirements.
>
> Owen – 
>
> ARIN NRPM Section 4.2.3.  "Reassigning and Reallocating Address Space to Customers" utilizes the term “Downstream” in 
> references to both downstream end-users and downstream ISPs documentation requirements.
>
> As the community has historically interpreted the phrase “downstream" to refer to connectivity customers (and further 
> that the requirements documented are applied in oder to have accurate operational utilization), ARIN continues to 
> interpret the policy as applicable to reissuance of resources to connectivity customers. 
>
> Of course, further policy clarity (whether to make clear that it does apply to non-connectivity reassignments or to 
> make clear it does not apply beyond downstream customers) would be most welcome; I believe you are already aware of 
> the policy proposal submission process if you want to propose updating it accordingly.

All of the organizations I know of that are leasing space apply the term downstream as it pertains to the issuance of 
the addresses regardless of the connectivity relationship.

I suppose policy clarity here could be useful, but I suspect that just like ISPs, the situation will basically boil 
down to “those that want to comply will do so in good faith and others will not.”

Owen