SWIP netblocks

[Alex Kamantauskas]

 This may sound a little extreme, but if you don't understand CIDR
 boundaries, than you should not be in the business of assigning address
 space.  However, as you point out, there may be instances where you
 cannot swip along the boundary.

 Is the last line in your message suggesting that ARIN will examine each
 non-CIDR boundary SWIP that comes in, or will it reject them all unless
 the SWIPer can justify why they need to swip along non-CIDR boundaries?

On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, ginny listman wrote:

> You are correct in your belief that not everyone understands CIDR.  If it
> requires ARIN to do some education, then that is what we would like to do.
> Yes, there may be more SWIP rejections, but that shouldn't prevent us
> from doing what should be done. As far as old blocks, we would not change
> what is currently in the database without permission from the POC.  I
> would be wrong of us to assume that the lack of CIDR bit boundary is due
> to a lack of knowledge. It may be necessary for ARIN to address each
> SWIPed netblock that is in question.
> 
> Ginny
> 
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Tanya Hinman wrote:
> 
> > It sounds like a good idea to enforce SWIP on the bit boundary, but I
> > believe many times SWIPs that are not on the bit boundary are completed by
> > individuals that do not completely understand CIDR. This may cause more SWIP
> > rejections for ARIN. Also, how will this affect the old blocks that are
> > SWIPped incorrectly? Will ARIN require that they all be reswipped or will
> > the old blocks be left as is?
> > 
> > Tanya
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dbwg-request at arin.net [mailto:dbwg-request at arin.net]On Behalf Of
> > ginny listman
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 11:10 AM
> > To: dbwg at arin.net
> > Subject: SWIP netblocks
> > 
> > 
> > In reviewing what is currently stored in the database, there are a number
> > of SWIPed netblocks that are not on the bit boundary.  For example,
> > instead of SWIPing 0 to 255, an entire /24, 1 to 254 was SWIPed.  In the
> > future, we will be operating in a cidr world, including displaying cidr
> > blocks in whois.  For a block that is 1 to 254, the display will include 2
> > /32, 2 /31, 2 /30, 2 /29, 2 /28, 2 /27, and 2 /26.  It would be a whole
> > lot cleaner to display 1 /24.
> > 
> > How do people feel about enforcing allocations/assignments based on a
> > single cidr block?  I could see an occasion where someone may want to
> > assign 2-4 cidr blocks at a single time, but can we enforce, or strongly
> > encouraging, a policy like this?  SWIP on the bit boundary.
> > 
> > Ginny
> > 
> 

-- 
Alex Kamantauskas
alexk at tugger.net