[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of Assignment Registration requirements between IPv4 and IPv6
Paul McNary
pmcnary at cameron.net
Mon Jul 17 14:53:07 EDT 2017
> Compliance with registry policy is indeed necessary to receive number
> resources;
> it is up to you to determine whether IP number resources are necessary
> for provision
> of your Internet services.
But doesn't ARIN registry policy have to follow the law concerning CPNI ?
This is where I have always had trouble with your comments John, you
are constantly making "veil" threats about our ability to receive ARIN
resources.
Then your staff says to ignore your "veil" threats.
Paul McNary
pmcnary at cameron.net
On 7/17/2017 1:33 PM, Jason Schiller wrote:
> David,
>
> Can you define voluntary?
>
> Is the voluntary choice to record a reassignment
> up to the USP?
>
> Or does the choice belong to the end-user?
>
>
> I suspect if reassignment is voluntary for ISPs, then they
> will just stop doing it. In some cases it is beneficial to the
> end-user, supporting multi-homing, having their own abuse
> contact info, etc...
>
> __Jason
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 1:08 PM, David Huberman <daveid at panix.com
> <mailto:daveid at panix.com>> wrote:
>
> In addition to these options/questions, I feel like we glossed
> over the question posed by Marty Hannigan: what is the value of
> REQUIRING SWIP anymore? As a community member (not as an AC
> member) I have trouble supporting any of these as I'm not sure I
> support SWIP being anything other than voluntary. Whois
> reassignments are not the proper place for the information LE
> wants, in my opinion, and has almost no value to NOCs. And ARIN
> doesn't need it anymore for qualification purposes for a scarce
> resource. So what's he point of all this? Genuine question; no
> tone implied.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 17, 2017, at 12:13 PM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com
> <mailto:jschiller at google.com>> wrote:
>
>> I am replying to bring the conversation to one of the suggestions
>> on the table.
>>
>> Owen DeLong's suggesting of SWIP all IPv6 business users, and
>> not Residential users,
>>
>> Or Kevin Blumberg (and David Farmer) suggestion of SWIP'ing all
>> prefixes that might show up as a more specific in the global routing
>> table.
>>
>>
>> These are roughly the same result, and have a question of which
>> has a more easily understandable policy.
>>
>> The question is who here supports one or both of these
>> proposals?
>>
>> Who oppose one (if so which one) or both of these proposals?
>>
>>
>> I would like to suggest one friendly amendment...
>> - ISPs are required to SWIP IP space that is a reallocation.
>> - ISPs are required to SWIP IP space that is a reassignment
>> whenever that down stream customer requests such. That
>> SWIP must be a reassign detail, reassign simple, or a
>> residential privacy (if applicable) per the customer request.
>>
>> ___Jason
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:42 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net
>> <mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:
>>
>> On 17 Jul 2017, at 9:47 AM, hostmaster at uneedus.com
>> <mailto:hostmaster at uneedus.com> wrote:
>> > ,,,
>> > This is the problem. ARIN is not a carrier. While disclosure to ARIN to obtain number
>> resources for the connection is OK, Public disclosure by or
>> at the direction of ARIN policy of elements like domain name,
>> name, address and telephone number is not. Since name,
>> address, telephone number and domain name have already been
>> identified have been defined in the order as elements of CPNI
>> that are protected, world disclosure by ARIN or because of
>> ARIN rules would not be a protected disclosure.
>> >
>> > The ISP might also be in trouble for providing the
>> information to ARIN, if they know that ARIN intends to
>> publish this information in a public directory, rather than
>> disclosing it to ARIN solely to maintain number resources.
>> As suggested by the OP, might have to call them customer 1-n.
>> However that would violate the NRPM as written. Since the
>> City, State and Zip Code are part of the address, even the
>> "protected" residential records CPNI are being disclosed in
>> violation of the CPNI Order.
>> >
>> > There is a big difference between disclosure to ARIN for
>> taking care of numbering policy, and disclosure to the entire
>> world. Third party disclosure is the main thing that the
>> CPNI rules are intended to address. That is only permitted
>> when it is needed for the provision of service.
>>
>> Compliance with registry policy is indeed necessary to
>> receive number resources;
>> it is up to you to determine whether IP number resources are
>> necessary for provision
>> of your Internet services.
>>
>> If you choose not to make use of Internet Numbers Registry
>> System resources for
>> provision of Internet services (or not assign them to your
>> customers), then that is
>> your choice. Some ISPs may feel that it is necessary to
>> seek consent of customers
>> who wish to have public IP number resources assigned in the
>> size that would result in
>> their publication in the public registry, whereas others may
>> not based on their reading
>> of applicable regulations regarding handling of CPNI
>> information. Such choices are
>> an operational and business matter left to each ISP to decide
>> based on their individual
>> understanding and circumstances.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> /John
>>
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> ARIN
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net
>> <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
>> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
>> experience any issues.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________________
>> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com
>> <mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006 <tel:%28571%29%20266-0006>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net
>> <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
>> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
>> experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net
> <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
> experience any issues.
>
>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________________
> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com
> <mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170717/7ffa945f/attachment.htm>
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list