From Tim at bobbroadband.com  Fri Jul  2 15:22:18 2010
From: Tim at bobbroadband.com (Tim Huffman)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:22:18 -0500
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
Message-ID: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>

I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our organization. Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in this. Does ARIN care about things like this? Should I report it, or should I just ignore it?

Tim Huffman
Director of Engineering
BOB - Business Only Broadband, LLC
O (630) 590-6012
C (630) 340-1925
tim at bobbroadband.com<mailto:tim at bobbroadband.com>
www.bobbroadband.com<http://www.bobbroadband.com/>
[cid:image001.jpg at 01CB19F1.FA2A25B0]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/c9b5b25f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3972 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/c9b5b25f/attachment.jpg>

From vixie at isc.org  Fri Jul  2 15:31:51 2010
From: vixie at isc.org (Paul Vixie)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 19:31:51 +0000
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 02 Jul 2010 14:22:18 EST."
	<F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com> 
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
Message-ID: <65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>

> From: Tim Huffman <Tim at bobbroadband.com>
> Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:22:18 -0500
> 
> I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our
> organization. Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in
> this. Does ARIN care about things like this? Should I report it, or
> should I just ignore it?

at my day job we just received two of these, both forwarded to ARIN's
fraud desk at <https://www.arin.net/resources/fraud/index.html>.

Paul Vixie
Chair, ARIN BoT


From scottleibrand at gmail.com  Fri Jul  2 15:35:13 2010
From: scottleibrand at gmail.com (Scott Leibrand)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:35:13 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
Message-ID: <4C2E3F71.5090908@gmail.com>

Such an offer could be legitimate: ARIN does allow transfers of IPv4 
space to "organizations that are within the ARIN region and that can 
demonstrate need for such resources in the exact amount  which they can 
justify under current ARIN policies."  For details, see 
https://www.arin.net/resources/request/transfers.html

At the moment, though, anyone who qualifies to receive space via 
transfer also qualifies to receive space directly from ARIN, so I don't 
expect a lot of legitimate transfers to occur until ARIN's free pool is 
exhausted...

-Scott

On Fri 7/2/2010 12:22 PM, Tim Huffman wrote:
>
> I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our organization. 
> Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in this. Does ARIN care 
> about things like this? Should I report it, or should I just ignore it?
>
> *Tim Huffman
> *Director of Engineering
> BOB - Business Only Broadband, LLC
> O (630) 590-6012
> C (630) 340-1925
> tim at bobbroadband.com <mailto:tim at bobbroadband.com>
> www.bobbroadband.com <http://www.bobbroadband.com/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/5236624d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3972 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/5236624d/attachment.jpe>

From kevin at steadfast.net  Fri Jul  2 15:30:32 2010
From: kevin at steadfast.net (Kevin Stange)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 14:30:32 -0500
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
Message-ID: <4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>

On 07/02/2010 02:22 PM, Tim Huffman wrote:
> I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our organization.
> Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in this. Does ARIN care
> about things like this? Should I report it, or should I just ignore it?
> 

This just came up on the NANOG list:

http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-July/023301.html

Is this the same guy you heard from?  I don't think there's really
anything you should or can do beyond refusing the offer.

-- 
Kevin Stange
Chief Technology Officer
Steadfast Networks
http://steadfast.net
Phone: 312-602-2689 ext. 203 | Fax: 312-602-2688 | Cell: 312-320-5867

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/6c763529/attachment.sig>

From Tim at bobbroadband.com  Fri Jul  2 15:39:15 2010
From: Tim at bobbroadband.com (Tim Huffman)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:39:15 -0500
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
	<4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>
Message-ID: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED76A@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>

Yep. Same guy. I'm forwarding it to ARIN's fraud desk.

Tim Huffman
Director of Engineering
BOB?- Business Only Broadband, LLC
O (630) 590-6012
C?(630) 340-1925
tim at bobbroadband.com
www.bobbroadband.com



-----Original Message-----
From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Kevin Stange
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 2:31 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space

On 07/02/2010 02:22 PM, Tim Huffman wrote:
> I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our organization.
> Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in this. Does ARIN care 
> about things like this? Should I report it, or should I just ignore it?
> 

This just came up on the NANOG list:

http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-July/023301.html

Is this the same guy you heard from?  I don't think there's really anything you should or can do beyond refusing the offer.

--
Kevin Stange
Chief Technology Officer
Steadfast Networks
http://steadfast.net
Phone: 312-602-2689 ext. 203 | Fax: 312-602-2688 | Cell: 312-320-5867


From Tony.Radzwon at integratelecom.com  Fri Jul  2 15:34:56 2010
From: Tony.Radzwon at integratelecom.com (Radzwon, Tony)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:34:56 -0500
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>
Message-ID: <FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>

I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15 CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Paul Vixie
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 2:32 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space

> From: Tim Huffman <Tim at bobbroadband.com>
> Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:22:18 -0500
> 
> I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our
> organization. Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in
> this. Does ARIN care about things like this? Should I report it, or
> should I just ignore it?

at my day job we just received two of these, both forwarded to ARIN's
fraud desk at <https://www.arin.net/resources/fraud/index.html>.

Paul Vixie
Chair, ARIN BoT
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


From Tony.Radzwon at integratelecom.com  Fri Jul  2 15:38:46 2010
From: Tony.Radzwon at integratelecom.com (Radzwon, Tony)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:38:46 -0500
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
	<4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>
Message-ID: <FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43B@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>

Same one I got

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Kevin Stange
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 2:31 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space

On 07/02/2010 02:22 PM, Tim Huffman wrote:
> I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our organization.
> Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in this. Does ARIN care 
> about things like this? Should I report it, or should I just ignore it?
> 

This just came up on the NANOG list:

http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-July/023301.html

Is this the same guy you heard from?  I don't think there's really anything you should or can do beyond refusing the offer.

--
Kevin Stange
Chief Technology Officer
Steadfast Networks
http://steadfast.net
Phone: 312-602-2689 ext. 203 | Fax: 312-602-2688 | Cell: 312-320-5867


From bill at telnetcommunications.com  Fri Jul  2 15:40:51 2010
From: bill at telnetcommunications.com (Bill Sandiford)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 15:40:51 -0400
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>
	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
Message-ID: <FE7D4327AABC0448A6281C0AC4445C7C82D237B7EC@Exchange2007.HostedMail.local>

They seem to be looking for IPs where the middle 2 octets are the same.  Looks like they are doing some sort of vanity DNS service.

Seems fishy to me.

Bill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-
> bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Radzwon, Tony
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 3:35 PM
> To: 'Paul Vixie'; arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
> 
> I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are
> trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also
> strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15
> CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-
> bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Paul Vixie
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 2:32 PM
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
> 
> > From: Tim Huffman <Tim at bobbroadband.com>
> > Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:22:18 -0500
> >
> > I recently received an offer to buy an IP block from our
> > organization. Needless to say, I have absolutely no interest in
> > this. Does ARIN care about things like this? Should I report it, or
> > should I just ignore it?
> 
> at my day job we just received two of these, both forwarded to ARIN's
> fraud desk at <https://www.arin.net/resources/fraud/index.html>.
> 
> Paul Vixie
> Chair, ARIN BoT
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


From berger at shout.net  Fri Jul  2 15:47:46 2010
From: berger at shout.net (Mike Berger)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 14:47:46 -0500
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>
	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
Message-ID: <4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net>

I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like this don't 
understand route aggregation.

On 7/2/10 2:34 PM, Radzwon, Tony wrote:
> I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15 CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.
>
>    



From tedm at ipinc.net  Fri Jul  2 15:56:06 2010
From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:56:06 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net>
Message-ID: <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>


I'm positive that this kind of "offer" will work like this, they
will send you a big check that you will deposit, then they will
say "oops the check was too large could you refund the difference"
then you send them a smaller check for the difference, and then
they disappear and their original check will bounce.

If I had a nickel for every time I had to explain that scheme
to a customer....

Ted

On 7/2/2010 12:47 PM, Mike Berger wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like this don't
> understand route aggregation.
>
> On 7/2/10 2:34 PM, Radzwon, Tony wrote:
>> I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are
>> trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also
>> strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15
>> CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


From elaine.bailey at corp.westpa.net  Fri Jul  2 15:59:31 2010
From: elaine.bailey at corp.westpa.net (Elaine Bailey)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:59:31 -0400
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <FE7D4327AABC0448A6281C0AC4445C7C82D237B7EC@Exchange2007.HostedMail.local>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<FE7D4327AABC0448A6281C0AC4445C7C82D237B7EC@Exchange2007.HostedMail.local>
Message-ID: <4C2E4523.1080700@corp.westpa.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/186e3617/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Fri Jul  2 16:24:13 2010
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 13:24:13 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net> <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
Message-ID: <AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>

Why would anyone ever send a partial refund before the original
check cleared?

Owen

On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> 
> I'm positive that this kind of "offer" will work like this, they
> will send you a big check that you will deposit, then they will
> say "oops the check was too large could you refund the difference"
> then you send them a smaller check for the difference, and then
> they disappear and their original check will bounce.
> 
> If I had a nickel for every time I had to explain that scheme
> to a customer....
> 
> Ted
> 
> On 7/2/2010 12:47 PM, Mike Berger wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like this don't
>> understand route aggregation.
>> 
>> On 7/2/10 2:34 PM, Radzwon, Tony wrote:
>>> I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are
>>> trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also
>>> strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15
>>> CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Discuss
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.



From rsm at fast-serv.com  Fri Jul  2 17:20:02 2010
From: rsm at fast-serv.com (Randy McAnally)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:20:02 -0400
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net> <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
Message-ID: <20100702211816.M26221@fast-serv.com>

> Why would anyone ever send a partial refund before the original
> check cleared?
> 
> Owen

It can takes a long time for checks to fully clear, sometimes up to 30 days or
more.  The banks do initial checks on things before issuing funds, but
ultimately the check can 'bounce' long after you've deposited it and assume
it's fully cleared.

--
Randy



From pclark at paxio.com  Fri Jul  2 17:28:32 2010
From: pclark at paxio.com (Phillip Clark)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 14:28:32 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E4523.1080700@corp.westpa.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>	<FE7D4327AABC0448A6281C0AC4445C7C82D237B7EC@Exchange2007.HostedMail.local>
	<4C2E4523.1080700@corp.westpa.net>
Message-ID: <4C2E5A00.4090207@paxio.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100702/f1f748a0/attachment.html>

From rs at seastrom.com  Fri Jul  2 17:55:44 2010
From: rs at seastrom.com (Robert E. Seastrom)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 17:55:44 -0400
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com> (Owen DeLong's
	message of "Fri, 2 Jul 2010 13:24:13 -0700")
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>
	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net> <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
Message-ID: <86hbkhv99b.fsf@seastrom.com>


Because there is "cleared" and then there is "cleared".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedited_Funds_Availability_Act

Fraudulent checks often take weeks to have the actual fraud turn up.

-r

Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> writes:

> Why would anyone ever send a partial refund before the original
> check cleared?
>
> Owen
>
> On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
>> 
>> I'm positive that this kind of "offer" will work like this, they
>> will send you a big check that you will deposit, then they will
>> say "oops the check was too large could you refund the difference"
>> then you send them a smaller check for the difference, and then
>> they disappear and their original check will bounce.
>> 
>> If I had a nickel for every time I had to explain that scheme
>> to a customer....
>> 
>> Ted
>> 
>> On 7/2/2010 12:47 PM, Mike Berger wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like this don't
>>> understand route aggregation.
>>> 
>>> On 7/2/10 2:34 PM, Radzwon, Tony wrote:
>>>> I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are
>>>> trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also
>>>> strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15
>>>> CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ARIN-Discuss
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Discuss
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


From whinery at hawaii.edu  Fri Jul  2 16:56:40 2010
From: whinery at hawaii.edu (Alan Whinery)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:56:40 -1000
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>
	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>
	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net> <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
Message-ID: <4C2E5288.5060802@hawaii.edu>


Why would anyone ever send a partial refund?
"Too bad -- use a calculator next time."

On the other hand, why would anyone take a cash offer for IPv4 addresses
in 2010, in the current climate? Our "offer" was $5000 for  a /24. Seems
low.

Alan
U. Hawaii

On 7/2/2010 10:24 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Why would anyone ever send a partial refund before the original
> check cleared?
> 
> Owen


From tedm at ipinc.net  Fri Jul  2 18:09:58 2010
From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:09:58 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net> <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
Message-ID: <4C2E63B6.3060406@ipinc.net>


For the same reason people:

1) Camp out for 2 days in front of Best Buy before Black Friday
to save $100 on a big screen TV set

2) Think that it's vitally important to choose Team Edward or Team Jacob

3) "Win" the Darwin Awards http://www.darwinawards.com

4) Purchase Lawn "gnomes"


Interesting and serious theory here to explain the real reason:

http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shermer_the_pattern_behind_self_deception.html

Ted

On 7/2/2010 1:24 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Why would anyone ever send a partial refund before the original
> check cleared?
>
> Owen
>
> On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm positive that this kind of "offer" will work like this, they
>> will send you a big check that you will deposit, then they will
>> say "oops the check was too large could you refund the difference"
>> then you send them a smaller check for the difference, and then
>> they disappear and their original check will bounce.
>>
>> If I had a nickel for every time I had to explain that scheme
>> to a customer....
>>
>> Ted
>>
>> On 7/2/2010 12:47 PM, Mike Berger wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like this don't
>>> understand route aggregation.
>>>
>>> On 7/2/10 2:34 PM, Radzwon, Tony wrote:
>>>> I just received a similar offer, It must be some hoax as they are
>>>> trying to get IP space I have assigned to customers already. Also
>>>> strange is they are looking at a /24 in the middle of one of my /15
>>>> CIDR's, so needless to say we would not sell it if we could.
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ARIN-Discuss
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Discuss
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>


From woody at pch.net  Fri Jul  2 18:18:15 2010
From: woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 15:18:15 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E63B6.3060406@ipinc.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net> <4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>
	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>
	<4C2E63B6.3060406@ipinc.net>
Message-ID: <599B8FC8-F099-412B-8523-761C6A2FD29B@pch.net>

>>>> I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like this don't
>>>> understand route aggregation.

You guys all seem pretty exited to waste a day discussing what idiots you think these folks are.  Has it occurred to any of you that you simply don't know their business, and they do?  If they're trying to sell a service that requires that end-users memorize an IP address, it's pretty darned important to them that the address be memorable.  What they're offering is entirely within legitimate ARIN policy, legitimate business practices, the law, and good judgement.  

These are not the droids you're looking for.  Move along.

                                -Bill







From michael.dillon at bt.com  Fri Jul  2 18:19:48 2010
From: michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 23:19:48 +0100
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43B@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com><4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>
	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43B@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
Message-ID: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671B096@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>

I suppose that he is just following the advice that I gave him on RIPE's
address policy list here
<http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/address-policy-wg at ripe.net/136859
82.html>

We have a couple of requests from him as well but I'm just not going to
bother replying. 

It is a crazy idea in the first place. What percentage of people who
have to manually type in an IP address are going to mistype it? And of
that percentage, what smaller percentage would not also mistype an
address like 8.8.8.8 ?

--Michael Dillon



From woody at pch.net  Fri Jul  2 18:31:03 2010
From: woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 15:31:03 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671B096@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com><4C2E3E58.3090401@steadfast.net>
	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43B@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>
	<28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671B096@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
Message-ID: <0A808250-5FDD-4C2A-B21F-EB3EDB0F4268@pch.net>


On Jul 2, 2010, at 3:19 PM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:
> It is a crazy idea in the first place. What percentage of people who
> have to manually type in an IP address are going to mistype it? And of
> that percentage, what smaller percentage would not also mistype an
> address like 8.8.8.8 ?

It's not a question of mis-typing, it's a question of _remembering.

How many people could remember 8.8.8.8?

How many people could remember 192.12.94.32?

The difference between those two quantities is revenue.

                                -Bill







From tedm at ipinc.net  Fri Jul  2 19:00:29 2010
From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:00:29 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <599B8FC8-F099-412B-8523-761C6A2FD29B@pch.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net>
	<4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>	<4C2E63B6.3060406@ipinc.net>
	<599B8FC8-F099-412B-8523-761C6A2FD29B@pch.net>
Message-ID: <4C2E6F8D.5080800@ipinc.net>



On 7/2/2010 3:18 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>>>>> I'm pretty sure the people who solicit address space like
>>>>> this don't understand route aggregation.
>
> You guys all seem pretty exited to waste a day discussing what idiots
> you think these folks are.  Has it occurred to any of you that you
> simply don't know their business, and they do?

After your post I went and investigated and now I'm positive
that anyone here (except for you, possibly) knows their business
better than they do.

 From the original post from them:

"...Our company Ideco is located in Russia and is in the business of
developing and selling Internet gateways for small and middle
businesses in Russia as well as billing software for ISPs.

We?re now starting a new project for Russia and Eastern Europe
that will provide secure Internet access for educational institutions,
commercial and non-profit organizations..."

It would take very little effort for them to design their
gateways so that the gateway boots, then using a FQDN, contacts
a server of theirs and obtains the DNS server numbers they actually
want to be used.

Or they could create a website so that the educational network admin
could go to that site and click a button and an active X control
could fill out the correct IP address in his Windows server.  (I'm
assuming that any customer who couldn't be trusted with typing in
an IP address correctly would be using a Windows server)

In short, there's many creative ways that they can distribute a
difficult-to-remember IP number, one that could change dynamically.

> If they're trying to
> sell a service that requires that end-users memorize an IP address,
> it's pretty darned important to them that the address be memorable.

A service that requires end-users to memorize an IP address is
not well-enough designed to be worth paying money for, IMHO.
Why do you think Google is giving away that 8.8.8.8 nonsense?
Google wants people to use 8.8.8.8 so they can use the query data
to do market research to benefit THEM, and they have the nerve
to slander legions of ISP's with bogus claims that ISPs run
insecure, overloaded DNS servers to get people to use their
servers.  Ideco is probably doing the exact same thing - on
one side they are going to claim that they are giving away
to nonprofits all this filter blocking stuff for free then
they are going to turn around and sell all the statistical query
data to spammers.

DNS query data should not be casually bandied around in this way.
To give you
an example if I'm a spy for the PRC all I have to do is break
into a DNS server that is known to be run by an ISP that is
friendly to Chinese political opponents and start logging hostnames
and after a while I'll be able to mine that data for
all of the hosts that my political opponents are using.

> What they're offering is entirely within legitimate ARIN policy,
> legitimate business practices, the law, and good judgement.
>

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do
something.

Ted

> These are not the droids you're looking for.  Move along.
>
> -Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ ARIN-Discuss You are
> receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). Unsubscribe or
> manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss Please contact
> info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


From woody at pch.net  Fri Jul  2 19:11:55 2010
From: woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 16:11:55 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <4C2E6F8D.5080800@ipinc.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net>
	<4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>	<4C2E63B6.3060406@ipinc.net>
	<599B8FC8-F099-412B-8523-761C6A2FD29B@pch.net>
	<4C2E6F8D.5080800@ipinc.net>
Message-ID: <8BC1FF6F-5456-40C8-9550-E9CA35DBB03A@pch.net>


On Jul 2, 2010, at 4:00 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> It would take very little effort for them to design their
> gateways so that the gateway boots, then using a FQDN, contacts
> a server of theirs and obtains the DNS server numbers they actually
> want to be used.

That's nice for the gateway.  What about the users?

> Or they could create a website so that the educational network admin
> could go to that site and click a button and an active X control
> could fill out the correct IP address in his Windows server.

That's nice for the network admin.  What about the users?

> In short, there's many creative ways that they can distribute a
> difficult-to-remember IP number, one that could change dynamically.

That's nice for whoever prints little wallet-cards, but what about the user, who has to remember an IP address, or always be carrying around a little wallet card?  Or get a tattoo?  Many end-users are averse to having IP addresses tattooed on parts of their bodies that they're willing to expose in a work environment.

> A service that requires end-users to memorize an IP address is
> not well-enough designed to be worth paying money for, IMHO.

Whether or not the user is paying isn't relevant.  If you think the DNS should have a bootstrap mechanism that doesn't require someone, somewhere, to know an IP address, that's great, but I suggest you take it up with DNSext, rather than ARIN.

                                -Bill







From vixie at isc.org  Sat Jul  3 15:46:06 2010
From: vixie at isc.org (Paul Vixie)
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2010 19:46:06 +0000
Subject: [arin-discuss] not fraud
Message-ID: <46473.1278186366@nsa.vix.com>

woody's right, the offers we all received to purchase IP address space were
not fraudulant nor were they a probable precursor to fraud. i saw this more
as a violation of "whois terms of use" (https://www.arin.net/whois_tou.html)
which says

	The ARIN WHOIS data is for Internet operational or technical
	research purposes pertaining to Internet operations only. You may
	not use, allow to use, or otherwise facilitate the use of ARIN
	WHOIS data for advertising, direct marketing, marketing research,
	or similar purposes. These Terms of Use are applicable to any
	compilation, repackaging, dissemination or other use of ARIN WHOIS
	data. If you fail to abide by these Terms, ARIN reserves the right
	to take reasonable and appropriate action, which may include,
	without limitation, restricting or terminating your access to WHOIS
	or other ARIN Services.

	You understand and agree that ARIN will treat your use of WHOIS as
	acceptance of these Terms. ARIN reserves the right to modify these
	Terms at any time. You should check back periodically for updates.

my concern is, if this is what whois is going to be used for, then folks are
going to be afraid to list any real e-mail address in their whois data.

so, me sending $dayjob's two copies of this bulk direct marketing / marketing
research / similar material to ARIN's fraud desk was a knee-jerk mistake on
my part. however, since <https://www.arin.net/contact_us.html> gives no more
specific information (this doesn't fit hostmaster@ or aupabuse@), i'll forgive
myself for using arin's fraud desk to report the problem.


From tedm at ipinc.net  Tue Jul  6 15:35:37 2010
From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt)
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:35:37 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] Offer to buy IP space
In-Reply-To: <8BC1FF6F-5456-40C8-9550-E9CA35DBB03A@pch.net>
References: <F8B9DDB2AF9FE8439B9DE97213412667F9593ED765@WNSE07BE01.wnsclients.com>	<65814.1278099111@nsa.vix.com>	<FA51EBD30E267D4AA9FA21007130D083012767FCA43A@MDCMAILBOX2.ads.integratelecom.com>	<4C2E4262.7040200@shout.net>
	<4C2E4456.9040905@ipinc.net>	<AAAC2508-A9BE-4EA8-994F-0E3DE13223EC@delong.com>	<4C2E63B6.3060406@ipinc.net>
	<599B8FC8-F099-412B-8523-761C6A2FD29B@pch.net>
	<4C2E6F8D.5080800@ipinc.net>
	<8BC1FF6F-5456-40C8-9550-E9CA35DBB03A@pch.net>
Message-ID: <4C338589.1040506@ipinc.net>



On 7/2/2010 4:11 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2010, at 4:00 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>> It would take very little effort for them to design their gateways
>> so that the gateway boots, then using a FQDN, contacts a server of
>> theirs and obtains the DNS server numbers they actually want to be
>> used.
>
> That's nice for the gateway.  What about the users?
>
>> Or they could create a website so that the educational network
>> admin could go to that site and click a button and an active X
>> control could fill out the correct IP address in his Windows
>> server.
>
> That's nice for the network admin.  What about the users?
>
>> In short, there's many creative ways that they can distribute a
>> difficult-to-remember IP number, one that could change
>> dynamically.
>
> That's nice for whoever prints little wallet-cards, but what about
> the user, who has to remember an IP address, or always be carrying
> around a little wallet card?  Or get a tattoo?  Many end-users are
> averse to having IP addresses tattooed on parts of their bodies that
> they're willing to expose in a work environment.
>

You can code up a little app that stuffs the IP number in
the PC and distribute this app.  It would be more useful IMHO than
the usual garbage apps that do stuff like add search toolbars
to the web browser.

>> A service that requires end-users to memorize an IP address is not
>> well-enough designed to be worth paying money for, IMHO.
>
> Whether or not the user is paying isn't relevant.  If you think the
> DNS should have a bootstrap mechanism that doesn't require someone,
> somewhere, to know an IP address, that's great, but I suggest you
> take it up with DNSext, rather than ARIN.
>

Your being deliberately obfuscating.  This has nothing to do with
a DNS bootstrapping mechanism and you know it.

This org is proposing to substitute THEIR nameserver IP numbers
for the ISP's nameserver IP addresses that the user would normally
obtain when they jack into a wireless or wired connection and
get an IP address via DHCP  (which contains the DNS server IP
addresses as you well know)  Presumably THEIR nameservers will not
return host IP numbers for "objectionable" websites and the users
will presumably like this.

If the user is within an educational org  (this company's target) then
the usual state of affairs is the org's network admin would use
these DNS server IPs in their DHCP server.  Then the end users would
be "protected"

If the end user is Ma and Pa Kettle in Cable-land, then Ma and Pa
Kettle aren't going to have sufficient technical expertise to even
be competent to change the DNS server IP numbers in their PeeCee,
let alone put in the right number, whether it's easy-to-remember or
not.

Bill, it's obviously been way too long since you have worked with
the general public.  I suggest you spend a day of penance answering
phone calls for your company's tech support line.  Once you get
3 or 4 requests for "where's the any key" you might reevaluate your
opinion that having users muck with their DNS server settings is
a Good Thing :-)

Seriously, the competent computer users know enough not to need
protecting against the dirty picture websites.  It's the incompetent
bozos that you cannot even trust with a burnt-out match that are
the market that wants filtering.  And the idea of having them change
any setting in their computer is a recipe for disaster.

Ted

> -Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>


From charles at office.tcsn.net  Wed Jul  7 15:43:04 2010
From: charles at office.tcsn.net (Charles O'Hern)
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 12:43:04 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
Message-ID: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>

I just posted the following as a question in ARIN's online ticket
system, but am wondering if anyone here has any input on my question.
(paragraphing inserted for readability.)

Our organization, TCSN-1, is currently directly allocated from ARIN a
/21, NET-208-64-216-0-1, and a /22, NET-208-94-140-0-1, for at total
yearly fee of $1250.

With the understanding that when obtaining an IPv6 allocation only the
greater of the two fees is charged and for the purposes of implementing
IPv6 dual-stacked with our existing IPv4 allocation we'd like to get an
IPv6 allocation of equal or lesser cost than our current IPv4 allocation.

Looking at the fee schedule at
https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html we see that this would be
something in the range of a /44 - /48 allocation, which should be more
than sufficient for our needs for any foreseeable future.

However in the NRPM section 6.4.3. it states that the minimum allocation
is to be a /32.

Does this mean that we have to increase our annual fees in order to
obtain an IPv6 allocation far in excess of our needs?
If so, why is there a fee schedule for allocations smaller than /32?

-- 
Charles O'Hern
Network Operations
TCSN - The Computer Shop Netlink
 
1306 Pine St. Paso Robles CA 93446
1-(805) 227-7000 1-(800) 974-DISK
http://www.tcsn.net abuse at tcsn.net



From alh-ietf at tndh.net  Wed Jul  7 18:29:50 2010
From: alh-ietf at tndh.net (Tony Hain)
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 15:29:50 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>
Message-ID: <0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>

It would appear from your web site that you provide internet access to
customers, so you would fall into the /32 policy bucket. Given your
statement that a /4x would be sufficient for your needs, you appear to be
assuming an allocation to your customers that is insufficient. Assume you
are allocating a /48 to each customer, then add those up. If that exceeds a
/32, then ask ARIN for whatever size that ends up being. If you fit within a
/32, then you can get by with the minimum for non-end-sites. 

Tony

--- 'IPv4 think' is about conservation above all else; IPv6 takes a long
term view.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-
> bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Charles O'Hern
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 12:43 PM
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee
> question
> 
> I just posted the following as a question in ARIN's online ticket
> system, but am wondering if anyone here has any input on my question.
> (paragraphing inserted for readability.)
> 
> Our organization, TCSN-1, is currently directly allocated from ARIN a
> /21, NET-208-64-216-0-1, and a /22, NET-208-94-140-0-1, for at total
> yearly fee of $1250.
> 
> With the understanding that when obtaining an IPv6 allocation only the
> greater of the two fees is charged and for the purposes of implementing
> IPv6 dual-stacked with our existing IPv4 allocation we'd like to get an
> IPv6 allocation of equal or lesser cost than our current IPv4
> allocation.
> 
> Looking at the fee schedule at
> https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html we see that this would be
> something in the range of a /44 - /48 allocation, which should be more
> than sufficient for our needs for any foreseeable future.
> 
> However in the NRPM section 6.4.3. it states that the minimum
> allocation
> is to be a /32.
> 
> Does this mean that we have to increase our annual fees in order to
> obtain an IPv6 allocation far in excess of our needs?
> If so, why is there a fee schedule for allocations smaller than /32?
> 
> --
> Charles O'Hern
> Network Operations
> TCSN - The Computer Shop Netlink
> 
> 1306 Pine St. Paso Robles CA 93446
> 1-(805) 227-7000 1-(800) 974-DISK
> http://www.tcsn.net abuse at tcsn.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.



From charles at office.tcsn.net  Wed Jul  7 20:26:19 2010
From: charles at office.tcsn.net (Charles O'Hern)
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 17:26:19 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>
	<0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>
Message-ID: <4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>

Yes we are an ISP, multi-homed, AS13525.  Apologies I didn't realize
that I neglected to mention our org status.

I'm going to avoid the minimun end user allocation/assignment issue.
I've seen that argument rage back and forth a few times on this and
the PPML list.  So in the interest of avoiding that occuring again,
I'll ignore any consideration of need for the moment.

The crux of the issue is that the minimum allocation size by NRPM
doubles our annual fees to ARIN, yet ARIN's own pricing structure for
ISP's includes listings for smaller allocations.  This leads me to two
points.  

1) The lack of consistency is a little confusing.  If the consensus of
the majority is that more IPv6 adoption is a good thing, shouldn't we
try to minimize confusion?

2) A doubling or more (if more than /32 is needed) of annual fees for
little to no capital gain will be a barrier to adoption for some.  Any
ISP currently running on less than a /20 IPv4 will face a fee increase
in order to adopt IPv6.  I am aware of the route aggregation issue in
regards to core router RAM and CPU capabilities, but is the loss of
small ISP IPv6 adoption an intentional sacrifice to ease the routing
table burden?

As a small ISP who really can't afford such an increase should we just
stop worrying about IPv6 at this time?  (honest question, I have
plenty of other issues with which to be concerned.)

Tony Hain wrote:
> It would appear from your web site that you provide internet access
> to customers, so you would fall into the /32 policy bucket. Given
> your statement that a /4x would be sufficient for your needs, you
> appear to be assuming an allocation to your customers that is
> insufficient. Assume you are allocating a /48 to each customer,
> then add those up. If that exceeds a /32, then ask ARIN for
> whatever size that ends up being. If you fit within a /32, then you
> can get by with the minimum for non-end-sites.
>
> Tony
>
> --- 'IPv4 think' is about conservation above all else; IPv6 takes a
> long term view.
>
>
> _______________________________________________ ARIN-Discuss You
> are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). Unsubscribe or
> manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss Please contact
> info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-- 
Charles O'Hern
Network Operations
 
TCSN - The Computer Shop Netlink
1306 Pine St. Paso Robles CA 93446
1-(805) 227-7000  1-(800) 974-DISK
http://www.tcsn.net  abuse at tcsn.net




From alh-ietf at tndh.net  Wed Jul  7 21:15:14 2010
From: alh-ietf at tndh.net (Tony Hain)
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 18:15:14 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>	<0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>
	<4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>
Message-ID: <0e3001cb1e3b$05508d60$0ff1a820$@net>

Charles O'Hern wrote:
> Yes we are an ISP, multi-homed, AS13525.  Apologies I didn't realize
> that I neglected to mention our org status.

It only matters because the /4x lengths are not available to an ISP.

> 
> I'm going to avoid the minimun end user allocation/assignment issue.
> I've seen that argument rage back and forth a few times on this and
> the PPML list.  So in the interest of avoiding that occuring again,
> I'll ignore any consideration of need for the moment.

I really don't care what length you end up assigning to your customers, but
I don't want to see people using the length of their ARIN allocation as the
justification for what a customer gets because that is backwards. The proper
way to approach it is to add up the customer allocations, then get a block
large enough.

> 
> The crux of the issue is that the minimum allocation size by NRPM
> doubles our annual fees to ARIN, yet ARIN's own pricing structure for
> ISP's includes listings for smaller allocations.  This leads me to two
> points.
> 
> 1) The lack of consistency is a little confusing.  If the consensus of
> the majority is that more IPv6 adoption is a good thing, shouldn't we
> try to minimize confusion?

I agree that this confusion needs to go away.

> 
> 2) A doubling or more (if more than /32 is needed) of annual fees for
> little to no capital gain will be a barrier to adoption for some.  Any
> ISP currently running on less than a /20 IPv4 will face a fee increase
> in order to adopt IPv6.  I am aware of the route aggregation issue in
> regards to core router RAM and CPU capabilities, but is the loss of
> small ISP IPv6 adoption an intentional sacrifice to ease the routing
> table burden?

I agree with you that your fee should be identical for a minimum IPv4 block
and a /32 IPv6 block, but I am not involved in fee structure discussions. My
personal opinion is that the fee for IPv4 should go up to match the IPv6
one. Again, I agree it shouldn't be confusing, and it shouldn't cost any
different for the minimum size block to be an ISP, but the cost for IPv4 has
to go up as managing it will consume the bulk of the overhead resources
relative to what it will take to manage IPv6. Just sorting through the
increasingly convoluted policies related to IPv4 will waste time both at
ARIN and for its members.

> 
> As a small ISP who really can't afford such an increase should we just
> stop worrying about IPv6 at this time?  (honest question, I have
> plenty of other issues with which to be concerned.)

In many ways the smaller players need to get out ahead of the bigger ones,
because once the bigger players start moving, the smaller ones without the
deep pockets will have a hard time keeping pace. Given there is a fee
problem, it needs to get resolved quickly as nobody should stop worrying
about IPv6 unless they plan to retire in the next year.

> 
> Tony Hain wrote:
> > It would appear from your web site that you provide internet access
> > to customers, so you would fall into the /32 policy bucket. Given
> > your statement that a /4x would be sufficient for your needs, you
> > appear to be assuming an allocation to your customers that is
> > insufficient. Assume you are allocating a /48 to each customer,
> > then add those up. If that exceeds a /32, then ask ARIN for
> > whatever size that ends up being. If you fit within a /32, then you
> > can get by with the minimum for non-end-sites.
> >
> > Tony
> >
> > --- 'IPv4 think' is about conservation above all else; IPv6 takes a
> > long term view.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________ ARIN-Discuss You
> > are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> > Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). Unsubscribe or
> > manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss Please contact
> > info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> 
> --
> Charles O'Hern
> Network Operations
> 
> TCSN - The Computer Shop Netlink
> 1306 Pine St. Paso Robles CA 93446
> 1-(805) 227-7000  1-(800) 974-DISK
> http://www.tcsn.net  abuse at tcsn.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.



From michael.dillon at bt.com  Thu Jul  8 03:32:55 2010
From: michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com)
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:32:55 +0100
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net><0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>
	<4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>
Message-ID: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671BCDD@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>


> I'm going to avoid the minimun end user allocation/assignment issue.
> I've seen that argument rage back and forth a few times on this and
> the PPML list.  So in the interest of avoiding that occuring again,
> I'll ignore any consideration of need for the moment.

Unfortunately, this is fundamental to IPv6 architecture. In order for 
IPv6 to work as planned, everyone must receive far more addresses than
they need.

> The crux of the issue is that the minimum allocation size by NRPM
> doubles our annual fees to ARIN, yet ARIN's own pricing structure for
> ISP's includes listings for smaller allocations.  This leads me to two
> points.
> 
> 1) The lack of consistency is a little confusing. 

Good point. ARIN really should stop publishing a fee schedule with
everything
in it because people misinterpret it as a price list where you can go
shopping.
It is misleading. Instead ARIN should publish separate fee schedules for
separate classes of member in order to make things clearer.

> If the consensus of
> the majority is that more IPv6 adoption is a good thing, shouldn't we
> try to minimize confusion?

Yes. And it would be good if the ARIN website had some clearly worked 
examples of how an IPv4 ISP can add IPv6 addressing and the implications
for annual fees.

> As a small ISP who really can't afford such an increase should we just
> stop worrying about IPv6 at this time?  (honest question, I have
> plenty of other issues with which to be concerned.)

Yes.
Not everyone has to get ready for IPv6 right now. In particular if you
are dependent on upstream providers who have not yet made IPv6 service
available to you, then there is nothing wrong with putting it off.
Ideally
you wouldn't totally ignore it but get your technical people to do some
experimenting with ULA addresses or a tunnel to he.net when they have
some spare moments.

It is the national providers and large regional providers who have the
biggest
risk in not being ready with IPv6 when IPv4 runout occurs.

--Michael Dillon



From rsm at fast-serv.com  Thu Jul  8 09:26:05 2010
From: rsm at fast-serv.com (Randy McAnally)
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 09:26:05 -0400
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net>
Message-ID: <20100708132343.M6554@fast-serv.com>

I raised this exact same question a few months back, you described it better
though.

--
Randy

---------- Original Message -----------
From: "Charles O'Hern" <charles at office.tcsn.net>
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Sent: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 12:43:04 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question

> I just posted the following as a question in ARIN's online ticket
> system, but am wondering if anyone here has any input on my question.
> (paragraphing inserted for readability.)
> 
> Our organization, TCSN-1, is currently directly allocated from ARIN a
> /21, NET-208-64-216-0-1, and a /22, NET-208-94-140-0-1, for at total
> yearly fee of $1250.
> 
> With the understanding that when obtaining an IPv6 allocation only 
> the greater of the two fees is charged and for the purposes of implementing
> IPv6 dual-stacked with our existing IPv4 allocation we'd like to get 
> an IPv6 allocation of equal or lesser cost than our current IPv4 allocation.
> 
> Looking at the fee schedule at
> https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html we see that this would be
> something in the range of a /44 - /48 allocation, which should be 
> more than sufficient for our needs for any foreseeable future.
> 
> However in the NRPM section 6.4.3. it states that the minimum allocation
> is to be a /32.
> 
> Does this mean that we have to increase our annual fees in order to
> obtain an IPv6 allocation far in excess of our needs?
> If so, why is there a fee schedule for allocations smaller than /32?
> 
> -- 
> Charles O'Hern
> Network Operations
> TCSN - The Computer Shop Netlink
> 
> 1306 Pine St. Paso Robles CA 93446
> 1-(805) 227-7000 1-(800) 974-DISK
> http://www.tcsn.net abuse at tcsn.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
------- End of Original Message -------



From owen at delong.com  Thu Jul  8 10:15:58 2010
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:15:58 -0700
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671BCDD@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net><0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>
	<4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>
	<28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671BCDD@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
Message-ID: <2C24E29C-430D-41C4-877E-3F4201FD0F52@delong.com>


On Jul 8, 2010, at 12:32 AM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:

> 
>> I'm going to avoid the minimun end user allocation/assignment issue.
>> I've seen that argument rage back and forth a few times on this and
>> the PPML list.  So in the interest of avoiding that occuring again,
>> I'll ignore any consideration of need for the moment.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is fundamental to IPv6 architecture. In order for 
> IPv6 to work as planned, everyone must receive far more addresses than
> they need.
> 
>> The crux of the issue is that the minimum allocation size by NRPM
>> doubles our annual fees to ARIN, yet ARIN's own pricing structure for
>> ISP's includes listings for smaller allocations.  This leads me to two
>> points.
>> 
>> 1) The lack of consistency is a little confusing. 
> 
> Good point. ARIN really should stop publishing a fee schedule with
> everything
> in it because people misinterpret it as a price list where you can go
> shopping.
> It is misleading. Instead ARIN should publish separate fee schedules for
> separate classes of member in order to make things clearer.
> 
I don't think that's the source of confusion here. I think the confusion comes
from the ISP table having prices for allocations smaller than the minimum
available.

Owen




From vixie at isc.org  Thu Jul  8 11:18:27 2010
From: vixie at isc.org (Paul Vixie)
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:18:27 +0000
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:32:55 +0100."
	<28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671BCDD@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net><0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net>
	<4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net>
	<28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671BCDD@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
Message-ID: <87917.1278602307@nsa.vix.com>

> Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:32:55 +0100
> From: <michael.dillon at bt.com>
> 
> > As a small ISP who really can't afford such an increase should we just
> > stop worrying about IPv6 at this time?  (honest question, I have plenty
> > of other issues with which to be concerned.)
> 
> Yes.  Not everyone has to get ready for IPv6 right now. In particular if
> you are dependent on upstream providers who have not yet made IPv6
> service available to you, then there is nothing wrong with putting it
> off.

i disagree.

> Ideally you wouldn't totally ignore it but get your technical people to
> do some experimenting with ULA addresses or a tunnel to he.net when they
> have some spare moments.

i think a tunnel, to he.net or elsewhere, is an necessary immediate step
even if it means renumbering when your physical upstreams gain ipv6
capability.

i also think experimenting, either with ULA or tunnels, is a necessary
immediate step for all providers, to be sure you've at least identified
all your non-ipv6-capable servers, routers, and business processes.

> It is the national providers and large regional providers who have the
> biggest risk in not being ready with IPv6 when IPv4 runout occurs.

while that risk does increase dramatically with footprint and capital plant,
*noone* in this business can afford the risk of completely ignoring ipv6.

i'm reminded of the math for getting as many survivors as possible from a
burning building.  the most important ingredients are avoiding panic, and
beginning the evacuation as early as possible, ideally before there's even
an obvious need for urgency.

i strongly recommend that all of us get ipv6 working before there's urgency.



From michael.dillon at bt.com  Thu Jul  8 11:52:45 2010
From: michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com)
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:52:45 +0100
Subject: [arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
In-Reply-To: <87917.1278602307@nsa.vix.com>
References: <4C34D8C8.4080102@office.tcsn.net><0df001cb1e23$e9bd0a40$bd371ec0$@net><4C351B2B.6000404@office.tcsn.net><28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C4974580671BCDD@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
	<87917.1278602307@nsa.vix.com>
Message-ID: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C49745806777817@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>

> > Ideally you wouldn't totally ignore it but get your technical people
> to
> > do some experimenting with ULA addresses or a tunnel to he.net when
> they
> > have some spare moments.
> 
> i think a tunnel, to he.net or elsewhere, is an necessary immediate
> step
> even if it means renumbering when your physical upstreams gain ipv6
> capability.
> 
> i also think experimenting, either with ULA or tunnels, is a necessary
> immediate step for all providers, to be sure you've at least
identified
> all your non-ipv6-capable servers, routers, and business processes.

I disagree. I think that the activities which you describe, and which I
generally agree with, are necessary training activities for any
technical
staff who have no previous IPv6 experience. But I don't classify that as
"getting ready for IPv6" from the management point of view because it 
doesn't address products, marketing, transition costs or even detailed
project planning.

> > It is the national providers and large regional providers who have
> the
> > biggest risk in not being ready with IPv6 when IPv4 runout occurs.
> 
> while that risk does increase dramatically with footprint and capital
> plant,
> *noone* in this business can afford the risk of completely ignoring
> ipv6.

In any business there are always people who make good money for many
years dealing in obsolete stuff. I am certain that there will be many
ISPs who can survive and thrive with IPv4 only services, particularly
in larger markets where they have dozens of competitors.

> i'm reminded of the math for getting as many survivors as possible
from
> a
> burning building.  the most important ingredients are avoiding panic,
> and
> beginning the evacuation as early as possible, ideally before there's
> even
> an obvious need for urgency.
> 
> i strongly recommend that all of us get ipv6 working before there's
> urgency.

Evacuating a burning building does not consume resources that could be
better spent elsewhere. In fact, spending too much on IPv6 too early
could
be dangerous to the survival of a business. The art of handling the IPv6
transition is to spend the money just before you can earn revenue based 
on that spend.

National providers and large regional providers have a much longer term
planning horizon and habitually spend their money months before the
revenue
starts to flow. Those organizations have to act now.

But smaller businesses have a more delicate juggling act to deal with,
and
if their upstream providers haven't given them a firm data for IPv6
Internet
access, then they are better off waiting. They will reap the benefits of
the
work that larger ISPs are doing with vendors.

But at the same time, smaller businesses need to learn enough about IPv6
in
order to make the detailed spending and product plans, which is why that
they should get their technical folks to start deploying IPv6 today in a
trial phase, geared for learning and planning. This is the kind of thing
that
can be done as a low priority background process that only consumes a
few 
hours a week, can mostly be done without impacting business as usual,
and
therefore doesn't cost enough extra to bother counting it.

--Michael Dillon