[arin-ppml] Revealing /32 customers?

[John Curran]

On Apr 26, 2012, at 3:02 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> 
> I don't doubt it and I'm pleased to hear that ARIN is vigorously
> defending the address pool. I just want to make sure that if we've
> decided, as a matter of consensus based public policy, that
> assignments smaller than /29 are permitted to remain a private matter
> between ISP and customer that the staff procedures are not, in a
> roundabout way, contradicting or partially nullifying that policy.

I do believe that the policy intent was to keep customer data private 
_with respect to public reassignment directories_, and not with
respect to answering ARIN inquiries regarding utilization, but I 
could be mistaken.  The policy origin of the language is in ARIN 
2010-14 <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2010_14.html>

> More to the point, if staff procedures are leaving any ISPs stranded
> with no choice but to reveal /32 customer identities, I'd like to see
> those procedures revised to better reflect the spirit of the /29
> boundary called out multiple times in the NRPM, such as in 4.2.3.7.1.

I believe the procedures we utilize are correct implementation of
the policy (and policy intent with respect to 2010-14), but if you 
want specifically for ARIN to never seek information on customers 
with smaller than /29 reassignments, then I'd recommend making policy 
to that effect.  Note to also amend NRPM 12, since that is definitely 
without constraints, regardless of the reading of ISP IPv4 policies.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN