Re: Squeezing IPs out of ARIN

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Apr 26, 2012, at 8:47 AM, Jack Bates wrote:

> On 4/26/2012 1:05 AM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> > If resources are used to provide service to a customer,  it is not
> > unreasonable that ARIN require that this to be shown,  what customer,
> > etc  -- the org. assigning or reallocating the resources is required
> > to have documented this.
> >
> > In addition to this documentation,  for reallocations of  /29 or  more
> > IPs, SWIP or Rwhois is also required by policy.
>
> It is unreasonable to require detailed customer information on /32 static assignments which make up the smallest 
> fraction of space compared to the huge blocks of dhcp pools (pools which justify allocations on their own). In 
> addition, a few show commands on a router displaying arp (with first 6 filtered) or ppp sessions (with username 
> filtered) or dhcp pool printouts showing utilization would make much more sense and provide better "proof" of 
> utilization then handing out private resident names of the <10% static /32 utilization pool.

/32s are not required. Get over it.

/29 and larger.

> For management statics, the same applies. A couple arp table captures generally should provide enough proof of 
> utilization.
>
> If ARIN really wants to be uptight about it, they can do what all the vendors do and set up a meeting session to 
> watch us type the commands. This is probably the hardest method to forge.
>
> I have not argued about any /29 or greater assignment which should be SWIP'd.
>
> Someone else in the thread complained that someone would be vague information in a SWIP concerning a customer, but I 
> see it's still listed under 4.2.3.7.3.2. So the NRPM still apparently recognizes the need for Residential privacy as 
> long as upstream contacts are available to handle abuse/technical contact.

The other person spoke of classes of businesses so the residential privacy policy would not apply.

Owen