Squeezing IPs out of ARIN

Jack Bates 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 
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.

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).


Jack



More information about the NANOG mailing list