[arin-ppml] Petition Underway - Policy Proposal 95: CustomerConfidentiality - Time Sensitive

Joe Morgan joe at joesdatacenter.com
Tue Feb 2 22:11:40 EST 2010

The colo industry or dedicated server industry almost always gives at
least a /29. Most customers will need multiple ips for things like
name servers, ssl certs, ect. I believe I can safely say that it is
almost a industry standard.  I can tell you from my experience the
customer is not going to be nearly as responsive as I am to security
or abuse complaints. I would much rather be able to put my contact
information for abuse than the customers for multiple reasons. My
company watches the abuse system 24/7 365 and needs to know about all
security or abuse complaints. If the customer is directly contacted
then how am I going to know that there is somebody on my network
violating my AUP? If you cannot get the abuse contact to answer your
complaints your just going to end up sending the complaint to me
anyway. I really cannot see how the address of phone number helps in
verifying accurate data, that can be just as accurate or inaccurate as
a company name. If you try and contact a customer and are unsatisfied
or cannot verify the data your just going to end up contacting me
about it. If I put my contact information down at least I know that I
am doing my part and providing accurate contact information so abuse
and security complaints can be handled quickly. At the end of the day
I am ultimately responsible for what happens on my network and I have
the best idea of what or how abuse should be handled so why shouldn't
I be in charge of deciding what that contact information is.
I think part of the problem is that people just want to get there
noses in other peoples business and for some reason feel that it is
there right to know my customers information. I really don't see why
anyone needs to know my customer list besides me.

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
> In a message written on Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 08:30:43PM -0600, James Hess wrote:
>> _A server colocated with their local ISP_   stop. One server does not
>> justify a /29,  it doesn't have to be SWIP'ed or listed in WHOIS.
> Actually....
> I have seen some colo ISP's that put every customer in a separate
> VLAN.  Typically they feed these two two routers, running VRRP or
> HSRP.  So a single server needs a subnet with space for 4 devices,
> router1, router2, virtual gateway, and server IP address.  The
> smallest subnet that can do that is a /29.
> So, it is possible for a single colocated server to consume a /29.
> Not everyone does it that way, of course.
> --
>       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
>        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

Thank You,
Joe Morgan
Joe's Datacenter, LLC

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list