<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Mar 8, 2025 at 1:30 PM Martin Hannigan <<a href="mailto:hannigan@gmail.com" target="_blank">hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 4:56 PM ARIN <<a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank">info@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><div><br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
4.4.1 Internet Exchange Allocations<br>
<br>
Internet Exchange operators must justify their need by providing a minimum of three initial participants not under common control connected to a shared, physical switching fabric to be used for the purpose of the exchange of data destined for and between the <br></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">respective networks. This justification must include participant names, ASNs and contact information for each named participant. The applicant’s Internet Exchange affiliated ASNs are not eligible to be included in meeting the participant requirement.<br>
<br></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Another important abuse tool which, for a yet unexplained reason, seems to have been removed. In the original proposal the authors suggested a way for ARIN to be able to 'dig deeper' if they chose to and included this:</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">"Staff can reasonably validate hardware and participants intent"</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div>The expectation is if ARIN staff were still concerned about the veracity of an application for resources they could always ask for the _ARIN region_ datacenter where the exchange point was being hosted to simply prove it. An email from the DC or a copy of a colo agreement, much like we do with asking applicants to prove dual homing, would be reasonable and sufficient.</div><div><br></div><div>To be clear in case, that was also to close the virtual internet exchange and pretend IX hole. Ensuring there's a physical switch and a data center location in the region ensures privileged resources aren't wasted. For these folks, v6 is an entirely reasonable alternative through normal channels.</div><div><br></div><div>What was the problem with that language(s)?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>-M<</div><div><br></div><div> <br></div></div></div>
</div>