Clarification: The lease of resources is not allowed under the policies in force

This proposal expressly states this, as the Policy Manual does not include any specific text to clarify this, despite the fact that the intention in this regard underlies the entire text and is applied to justify the need for resources.

This proposal states this explicitly, as the Policy Manual does not include any specific text to clarify this, despite the fact that the intention in this regard underlies the entire text and is applied to justify the need for resources.

Thus, addresses are not property that can be traded or used to do business.

Thus, addresses are not freehold property that can be traded or used to do business.

Therefore, to make it absolutely clear and eliminate any doubts, the policies should explicitly state that addresses may not be leased “per se”, but only as part of a direct connectivity service.

Therefore, so that there can be no doubt about this, the policies should explicitly state that addresses may not be leased “per se”, but only as part of a direct connectivity service.

Definitions 2.3.2.1 IPv4 addresses are delegated LACNIC shall allocate Internet resources according to a delegation plan.

Definitions 2.3.2.1 IPv4 Addresses are Delegated LACNIC shall allocate Internet resources according to a delegation plan.

(new text in section 1.14.1, renumber the following sections) New text Analyze diff 1.

(new text in section 1.14.1, renumber subsequent sections) New text Analyze diff 1.

Definitions and General Mandates (Deleted, renumber the following sections) (Deleted, renumber the following sections) 1.14.1 Internet resources are delegated, not property.

Definitions and General Mandates (Deleted, renumber the following sections) 1.14.1 Internet resources are delegated and not their holder's property.

Thus, the lease of addresses is not considered acceptable, nor does it justify need, unless they are part of a set of services based, at least, on direct connectivity.

Therefore, the lease or any form of transfer of addresses, with or without a financial or other type of consideration, is not acceptable, nor does it justify need, unless they are part of a set of services based, at least, on direct connectivity.

Additional information The policy manuals of other RIRs do not explicitly authorize the lease of addresses, so equivalent proposals will be presented there.

Additional information Other RIRs do not explicitly authorize the lease of addresses.

Additional information The policy manuals of other RIRs do not explicitly authorize the lease of addresses, so equivalent proposals will be presented there.

Given that their policy manuals are not explicit in this sense, equivalent proposals have been presented in ARIN and APNIC and will later be presented in the others.

Timetable - References - Presented at: LACNIC 37 (04/05/2022)

Timetable - References - Presented at: LACNIC 38 (04/10/2022)

Specifically, the justification of the need for the addresses would not be valid for address blocks whose purpose is not to connect clients of an LIR/ISP and, therefore, the renewal of the annual license to use of the addresses would not be valid either.

Specifically, the justification of the need for the addresses would not be valid for address blocks whose purpose is not to connect clients of an LIR/ISP and, therefore, the renewal of the annual license to use the addresses would not be valid either.

This proposal states this explicitly, as the Policy Manual does not include any specific text to clarify this, despite the fact that the intention in this regard underlies the entire text and is applied to justify the need for resources.

This proposal states this explicitly, as the Policy Manual does not include any specific text to clarify this, despite the fact that this intention underlies the entire text and is applied to justify the need for resources.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve) RIRs were designed to manage, distribute, and assign resources based on actual need, such that an LIR/ISP will have the addresses needed to connect its clients directly based on justified need.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve) RIRs/NIRs were designed to manage, distribute, and assign resources based on actual need, such that an LIR/ISP will have the addresses needed to connect its clients directly based on justified need.

When the justification of the need for the resources disappears for whatever reason, the most honorable thing to do would be to return the addresses to the RIR.

When the justification of the need for the resources disappears for whatever reason, the most honorable thing to do would be to return the addresses to the RIR/NIR.

Another alternative would be to transfer such resources, for which there are appropriate policies in place.

Another alternative would be to transfer such resources, an option for which we have appropriate policies in place.

If authorized, contrary to the original spirit of the policies and the very existence of the RIRs, the lease of addresses would eliminate the link between connectivity and addresses.

If authorized, contrary to the original spirit of the policies and the very existence of the RIRs/NIRs, any form of address leasing would eliminate the link between connectivity and addresses.

This would also create security issues, given that, in the absence of connectivity, the member of the RIR receiving the license to use the addresses does not have immediate physical control to manage or filter these resources, something that could potentially result in damages to the entire community.

This would also create security issues, as in the absence of connectivity, the organization that receives the license to use the addresses does not have immediate physical control to manage or filter these resources, something that could potentially result in damages to the entire community.

Therefore, so that there can be no doubt about this, the policies should explicitly state that addresses may not be leased “per se”, but only as part of a direct connectivity service.

Therefore, in order to clarify any doubts in this regard, the policies should explicitly state that addresses may not be leased “per se”, but only as part of a direct connectivity service.

This proposal unifies these texts for reasons of simplicity. Current text 1.

The intent is not to require annual re-evaluations of the resources, but rather to maintain the current spirit of the policies and unify IPv4 and IPv6.

Current text 1.

Current text 2.3.2.1 IPv4 addresses are delegated LACNIC shall allocate Internet resources according to a delegation plan.

Definitions 2.3.2.1 IPv4 Addresses are Delegated LACNIC shall allocate Internet resources according to a delegation plan.

Current text 2.3.2.1 IPv4 addresses are delegated LACNIC shall allocate Internet resources according to a delegation plan.

4.4.1 Address space not to be considered property It is contrary to the goals of this document and is not in the interests of the Internet community as a whole for address space to be considered freehold property.

4.3.1 Address space not to be considered property It is contrary to the goals of this document and is not in the interests of the Internet community as a whole for address space to be considered freehold property.