[arin-ppml] IPv4 SWIP requirements (?)

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

Greetings all,

My apologies for barging in to the middle of a serious dicsussion
about an actual draft ARIN proposal, just to ask a naive question,
but I really did want to get some help understanding this.  And as
long as it is being discussed anyway...

I only watch the traffic on this mailing list out of the corner 
of one eye, while I'm actually working on other, and mostly unrelated
things, but I do believe that I've seen more than one reference here
recently to some purported/alleged requirement that each allocation
of ARIN IPv4 space that is sub-assigned to a given customer is supposedly
required to have its own "SWIP" which I assume means that it must also
get its own record in the ARIN data base, yes?

If true, this comes as a big shock and surprise to me, and I'd appreciate
someone giving me the exact citation for this rule, so that I can properly
cite it to others.

Anyway, assuming that such a rule does exist, it would seem to be, as
the old saying goes, a rule which is "more honored in the breach than
in the observance".  I -daily- see cases where sub-parts of some IPv4
allocation that was made to some provider have quite clearly been given
over to this spammer or to that spammer, and I am likewise daily
frustrated at not being able to gather more information, e.g. from
ARIN WHOIS, or even, in general, from Rwhois services, about the identities
of these spammers.

So, my final question:  Assuming that such a "rule" does exist, i.e. one
requiring sub-allocations of /29 or larger to be documented in the ARIN
WHOIS data base, then what exactly is the penality for a provider who does
not adhere to this rule?  Are they sent to bed without dessert?

Thank you all for your indulgence of my naive questions.


Regards,
rfg