[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 95: Customer Confidentiality

Steve Bertrand steve at ibctech.ca
Thu Jan 28 21:27:00 EST 2010

George Bonser wrote:
> In other words, the proposal only makes sense if a SWIPed network, in
> order to be anonymous, can not be multi-homed, can not announce the
> network to any other provider, and the ONLY transit path to the network
> must be through you.
> If the SWIPed network is multi-homed, then I would say under no
> circumstances can they remain private in the ARIN listing.
> And once you arrive there, what was the purpose of SWIPing them the
> network in the first place?  And how do you enforce that rule?

George, that is what I was just thinking after re-reading my last message.

It's all well and fscking dandy for us who love to work in this
industry, but in reality, there is no policing.

Does it really matter? The only way policy will ever be completely
adhered to is if we can free up ARIN resources from administration, and
allow them more time to perform auditing functions.

...that wouldn't be a bad thing either, coming close to run-out time (imho).


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list