Squeezing IPs out of ARIN
jbates at brightok.net
Thu Apr 26 10:47:16 CDT 2012
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.
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
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 220.127.116.11.3.2. So the NRPM still apparently recognizes the need for
Residential privacy as long as upstream contacts are available to handle
I didn't see in the NRPM where SWIP was necessary for /32 assignments,
nor that such contact information should be handed to ARIN. This is the
difference between NRPM and ARIN implementation of NRPM. ARIN has always
asked for dhcp pool counts versus actual customer counts, dialup counts,
dialup ratios, etc. They have also always asked for SWIP/records for /29
or larger assignments. I've always been surprised that they don't ask
for a few router/server captures as verification. Instead they ask for
information which isn't pertinent to justification, the <10% assignments
(when the 90% more than justifies on its own).
More information about the NANOG