[ARIN-20010411.1637] maintainers at ARIN and rwhois

Fri Apr 20 13:55:41 EDT 2001

Hello Lyric-

Thank you for your input on this matter.

We realize that rwhois was not mentioned in the original policy statement
and that this may be causing some confusion.  We will review the policy
statement below and attempt to clarify the issues mentioned.  Thanks again.

Regards,

Leslie Nobile
Director of Registration Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

> To: reassign at arin.net
> cc: ppml at arin.net, the address keepers <vipar at verio.net>
> Subject: [ARIN-20010411.1637] maintainers at ARIN and rwhois
> Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.21.0104181721340.4986-100000 at eng0.dfw.verio.net>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> X-MTS-Ticket: 20010411.1637
> X-MTS-Type: reassign
> X-MTS-Mode: Unknown
> X-MTS-Priority: Normal
> X-MTS-Status: Open
> X-MTS-Timestamp: 20010418193849
> Status: RO
> X-Status:
> X-Keywords:
> at the last ARIN meeting in San Francisco we discussed the gist of the
> below policy.  Randy Bush and I raised some concerns about it in
> relationship to companies such as Verio that have an rwhois database and
> for whose customers this does not apply.  Lesley Johnson said that ARIN
> would make sure that this caveat was taken care of.
> I realize that this was a canned response that was sent out to a generic
> question, however the generic customer is a Verio customer, and this does
> not apply to them. it has created some confusion and general running about
> by the customer and our lower level support teams.
> I realize that it would be difficult (if not impossible) to tell who a
> questioner's upstream ISP was, so I am wondering if a sentence could be
> added to the message to say that this policy does not apply if the
> upstream ISP uses rwhois.  I realize that this may seem obvious to some,
> but there are many out there that don't understand the intricacies of the
> swip process.
> thanks for your time,
> lyric
> ---------------------------
> lyric apted
> ip engineering manager, vipar
> vipar at verio.net
> verio, inc.
> ---------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Reassign Role Account [mailto:reassign at arin.net]
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 11:53 AM
> To: rmartin at bhwy.com
> Subject: Re: your mail
> Hello,
> Due to a recent policy change discussed by the ARIN Members,
> maintainer
> ID's will no longer be freely applied to downstream reassignments that
> have been "assigned" as opposed to "allocated".  Reassignment records
> are not permitted to be altered in any way by anyone other than the
> coordinator of the parental block.
> It has been decided that downstream customer petition their upstream
> providers to grant permission to change their reassignment from an
> assignment to an allocation.  In requesting this from your upstream
> providers, you can give them one of two options available.
> 1.  If a customer who has been assigned address space from their
> upstream provider wishes to assign address space further downstream,
> they are encouraged to petition their upstream provider to re-SWIP the
> address space as an allocation.  This involves deleting the original
> SWIP entry and submitting a new SWIP with the allocation being shown.
> *Please note, the upstream provider would need to create a new unique
> net handle for the "re-allocated" block in order for the SWIP request
> to go through.
> 2.  Customers can also petition their upstream providers to send a
> confirmation email message into hostmaster at arin.net stating that
> they would like to have ARIN change the reassignment from assigned
> to allocate.
> If the upstream provider is unresponsive in a reasonable amount of
> time, the downstream customer may petition ARIN to enact this change.
> ARIN will make it's best attempt to contact the upstream provider to
> obtain their permission.  If the provider declines permission, ARIN
> will notify the petitioner as such.  If the provider is unresponsive
> after 10 business days, ARIN will accede to the petitioner's request
> and notify the upstream of the change(s).
> Regards,
> Registration Services Group
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
> ===================================================================
> email                              hostmaster at ARIN.NET
> ftp, whois                         rs.arin.net
> website                            http://www.arin.net
> ===================================================================
> by ops.arin.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id RAA13914
> for <reassign at mailhost.arin.net>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:56:39 -0400
> (EDT)
> Received: from chillywilly.bhwy.net ([209.189.86.252])
> by rs2.arin.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA08078
> for <reassign at arin.net>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:56:38 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from saibabe (xrouter.bhwy.net [209.189.86.250])
> (authenticated)
> by chillywilly.bhwy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3BM3TT09342;
> Wed, 11 Apr 2001 15:03:30 -0700
> From: "Bob Martin - BHI" <rmartin at bhwy.com>
> To: <reassign at arin.net>
> Cc: "Dave Palais" <dkpalais at aol.com>
> Subject: [ARIN-20010411.1637] Broadband Highway, Inc. Address
> Requirements
> & Maintainer ID
> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 15:00:00 -0700
> Message-ID: <NEBBIIHJKLGFOJAPKGOKEEKLCBAA.rmartin at bhwy.com>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
> Importance: Normal
> X-MTS-Ticket: 20010411.1637
> X-MTS-Type: reassign
> X-MTS-Mode: Unknown
> X-MTS-Priority: Normal
> X-MTS-Status: Open
> X-MTS-Timestamp: 20010411175640
> X-Status:
> X-Keywords:
> Status: OR
> WDB_version:1.4
> ---
> ___
> Broadband Highway, Inc. is a small startup ISP who is utilizing
> Verio as
> their upstream ISP.  I am writing to get my maintainer ID.
> I have downloaded the ARIN web pages, which provides me with
> information
> I
> need to receive my own addresses, although I am confused about some
> of
> it.
> Perhaps you can help me.
> We initially started utilizing NAT for many customer connections out
> to
> the
> Internet.  We currently have been assigned 4 non-contiguous class C
> Ipv4
> address space, which we have started to allocate on a /28 boundary.
> We
> need
> to drop the NAT methodology due to the increased administrative and
> processor overhead.  We currently have 31 buildings "lit up", with
> over
> 110
> subscribers.  Since we have 4 sales people eagerly selling high
> bandwidth
> customers, I need to convert them to their own addresses, drop NAT,
> and
> implement BGP since we want to get a second Verio connection, which
> we
> are
> paying for, going ASAP.
> Our sales goal is to have 16 subscribers per building by the end of
> the
> second quarter, add 5 more buildings, and if they are allocated on
> the
> /28
> boundary (basically 16 addresses), then I will need 31 class C
> address
> space.  Since all the information, which I read on the Web site,
> requires
> me
> to justify the addresses from past history, I will not be able to do
> so.
> I
> do, however, feel that we should get our own address space directly
> from
> ARIN.
> I appreciate your input.
> Sincerely,
> Bob Martin
> ____
> Our callback number is (214) 583-6428 (please do not give to customers)
> I am Doug White
> My email address is dwhite at verio.net but please reply to all.
> The date is   4/17/2001
> The time is 15:32 CST
> =-= Verio Premier Support
>
>