[arin-ppml] Clarify /29 assignment identification requirement

Jeffrey Lyon jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net
Fri Apr 27 14:21:43 EDT 2012

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Jo Rhett <jrhett at netconsonance.com> wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2012, at 3:39 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>   1. Policy Proposal Name: Clarify /29 assignment identification requirement
> I do not support this proposal. In fact this issue would bring me very
> actively out against it. In particular because it will effectively remove
> all validation of mobile phone, cable and dsl operators.
> It may be tricky to say "exactly this customer has this IP" but it is fairly
> trivial to show ARIN that you have a pool of customers this size who are
> configured within the given dynamic pool. ARIN has been very flexible with
> accepting the information in the form it was the easiest for us to provide
> it at the time.
> Re "fairly trivial": unless you have given each customer IP information and
> then forgotten it, and you have no idea who has what or how they got it…
> which is simply isn't a valid way to operate. You have this information.
> --
> Jo Rhett
> Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet
> projects.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

My position is that any assignment of < /29 to a private individual
should be classifiable as "Private assignment" without further
discussion, so long as these assignments do not make up a majority of
the justification.

Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP
President | (757) 304-0668
Black Lotus Communications

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list