[arin-ppml] Revealing /32 customers?

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Thu Apr 26 18:16:18 EDT 2012

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

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.


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list