[Fwd: Reassignment Proposal]

[Linda]

Good Afternoon All,

I prefer to use SWIP for reassignments/allocations.  We do not use RWHOIS but are
in favor of upgrading the code.  Would the proposed IRR-like mechanism be able to
work in conjunction with swip?  I don't see the majority agreeing to use a single
method.

Linda Werner


ginny listman wrote:

> Tanya,
>
> Since this is more a question of where ARIN should invest resources in
> developing, and less a policy issue, I would like to move the discussion
> to the dbwg list.
>
> Developing a IRR-like mechanism to monitor reassignments is an excellent
> idea, and should be discuss further.  As you recall, at the Member
> Meeting, members clearly expressed the desire for ARIN to invest resources
> in "fixing" RWHOIS.  We have done some initial analysis, and we would
> completely rewrite it, most likely using PERL.
>
> Before Engineering proceeds, I would like to take a survey of what
> reassigment method the membership would most likely use.  We can then
> apply resources accordingly.  The choices are:
>
> SWIP
> RWHOIS
> IRR like method
>
> All three have pluses and minuses.  Ideally we would like to see a single
> method that would allow for the maintenance of reassignment information at
> either the ISP or at ARIN.  Realistically, we would need a method to
> maintain data centrally (SWIP), and a method to maintain data local
> (RWHOIS, or something else). Of course, the more responses received will
> give us a better sense of what the membership wants.
>
> Ginny Listman
> Director of Engineering
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Tanya Hinman wrote:
>
> > Lee,
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback and yes our responses would be in RPSL.
> > We did discuss RWHOIS briefly at the last ARIN meeting in San Francisco.
> > Most people wanted to see the code upgraded and there was a suggestion that
> > ARIN take that responsibility. I am unsure of what the outcome of that
> > suggestion was though. Talks of RWHOIS and the code upgrade have been going
> > on for a few years now, but it appears that no one wants the job of
> > upgrading the code.
> >
> > Tanya
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lee Howard [mailto:lhoward at UU.NET]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 2:40 PM
> > To: Tanya Hinman
> > Cc: ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: Re: Reassignment Proposal
> >
> >
> > I've been thinking along similar lines for a while.  Presumable, eveyone
> > has a database of their IP allocations (for some people, this database
> > is a spreadsheet or spiral-bound notebook).  Trying to keep that database
> > in sync with the IRR (whether ARIN, RADB, or internal) and SWIP is
> > difficult, and distributing data queries to the database of record makes
> > a lot of sense to me.  Much like DNS, come to think of it.
> >
> > Would you provide responses in RPSL?
> >
> > I seem to recall ARIN announcing the publication of RWHOIS output
> > requirements, but I can't find them (or anything about RWHOIS) on the
> > ARIN site map.  RWHOIS is on the agenda for 4/4/2000 Public Policy
> > Meeting, but my meeting notes don't have anything more specific.  In
> > fact, there are no meeting minutes on ARIN's site for that meeting.
> >
> > I'm all in favor of a combined RWHOIS/IRR responder.
> >
> > Lee Howard
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Tanya Hinman wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:44:32 -0400
> > > From: Tanya Hinman <thinman at clp.cw.net>
> > > To: ppml at arin.net
> > > Subject: Reassignment Proposal
> > >
> > >
> > > We would like to propose the creation of a third reassignment option in
> > > conjunction with the current SWIP and RWHOIS options. As companies expand
> > > globally, it would be much simpler for them to update WHOIS data in their
> > > own one Registry rather than the three RIRs. We would like to create our
> > own
> > > WHOIS database within our Routing Registry. This would be similar to the
> > way
> > > RIPE represents WHOIS information along with their Routing Registry, and
> > it
> > > would be in place of a stand alone RWHOIS database which some of the other
> > > ISP's are currently using.
> > >
> > > 1)If this is accepted by all three RIRs it would be very efficient and it
> > > may help to relieve some of the load from the RIR's.
> > > 2)If the RIRs were to Mirror the WHOIS data from ours/other ISPs'
> > > Registries, it would also allow queries from the RIRs registries rather
> > than
> > > referencing the customer's URL like the current RWHOIS reference.
> > > 3)It would be much easier to update and keep data accurate if all the data
> > > is managed using the same database.
> > > 4)Guidelines for the format of this WHOIS option will need to be set in
> > > order to implement a standard.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Tanya Hinman
> > > Cable & Wireless
> > >
> >
> >