72/8 friendly reminder

Thu Mar 24 15:30:26 UTC 2005

At 10:06 AM 3/24/2005, Jon Lewis wrote:

>On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote:
> >
> > > In any case, it is not important how the message
> > > gets communicated to ARIN. What is important is for
> > > network operators to *TELL* ARIN what they need ARIN
> >
> > is arin the problem here? or are 'lazy'/'dumb'/'mistaken'/'poorly
> > informed' admins the problem?
>
>Lazy/misguided/ex admins / downsized networks are the problem.  ARIN is in
>a unique position to be able to do something to at least try to mitigate
>the problem without too much effort before handing "damaged IP space" out
>to members.  The current situation frustrates those who don't know what to
>do, and encourages them to look elsewhere for the IP space they need.

I think it's important to remember the "lazy/dumb/mistaken/poorly informed" 
folk alluded to above are NOT the ones receiving IP address space, but 
people elsewhere in (and all over) the world.

ARIN does not provide any statement of suitability of the address space for 
any purpose. That's nice for the lawyers, but pretty useless from a 
customer satisfaction and network operations standpoint.

The idea of ARIN temporarily lighting address space in any new block, and 
providing a test target is reasonable, relatively inexpensive and sensible.

Paying members of ARIN are today negativelty impacted by receiving 
assignments that remain in filters. It clearly makes little sense for those 
receiving address space to each have to expend significant time and effort 
to turn the address space into usable space. As such, the paying customers 
& members should consider requesting this be a function that could be best 
handled centrally by ARIN.