[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-139 No reassignment without networkservice
gbonser at seven.com
Fri Apr 8 17:26:07 EDT 2011
> I disagree with you about the problems RIPE has experienced and I also
> don't feel that this measure
> is draconian at all. It merely requires that LIRs in the ARIN region
> providing network services to
> the customers that they also provide address resources to.
> I did not draw the same conclusions as you did from the discussion a
> couple of months back.
I just wonder how it would be enforced. So if you have someone leasing
legacy space, there would be nothing ARIN could do. So that is one way
around it. In the case of using ARIN allocated space, even if one did
not have a network connection to the lessee, the LIR would still need to
maintain utilization requirements (for v4). But creating a network
relationship is as easy as giving someone a dialup modem login; it is
still easy to get around.
Is the spririt of what you are saying that not only does the end user
require a network connection with the provider that also the traffic
must be routed through the provider with the LIR having the most
specific routing announcement for that leased block? I believe that the
spirit of what you are trying to say is that the LIR have a network
relationship meaning that the LIR is actually a provider of significant
services for the block being allocated. I just don't see a good way to
enforce that. I have a couple of blocks from one provider that I don't
announce to them. I do maintain a relationship with them but only a
The point being that I wonder what this language is going to solve. If
you are giving out IP address space, I guess you now need to buy a modem
and give your customers the phone number.
More information about the ARIN-PPML