Anyone have any tips for getting IPs from ARIN? For an end-user allocation they are requesting that we provide customer names for existing allocations, which is information that will take a while to obtain. They are insisting that this is standard process and something that everyone does when requesting IPs. Has anyone actually had to do this?
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:32 AM, <admin@thecpaneladmin.com> wrote:
Indeed. It's worked this way for a long time. When starting a new organization, there's a bit of a chicken and egg problem with IP space. If anyone could get IP space just for asking for it, it would have been consumed too quickly. So, organizations must first get some space assigned to them from an upstream provider and begin using it. At some point the current usage and growth rate of the assigned space will justify a direct allocation. Then, you can renumber into your new space and be totally independent. Cheers, jof
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
That's not entirely true. What you say applies to one possible way for an ISP to get an allocation. It does not apply at all to end-users.
Even for end-user allocations, they would still need to fulfill the requirements of 4.3.3 in the ARIN NRPM (https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four33), no? I suppose for "immediate need" assignments, this can be short circuited, but from what I know those are pretty rare. Am I missing something? Cheers, jof
On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
Yes, but, that utilization can be documented need for X hosts to be numbered in an initial deployment, it does not have to be X existing hosts numbered from some other set of resources. It can also be made up of hosts numbered from RFC-1918 space which now need globally unique addresses for whatever reason.
I suppose for "immediate need" assignments, this can be short circuited, but from what I know those are pretty rare.
Not all that rare, but, yes, relatively rare.
Am I missing something?
I'm not sure. I know that I have no trouble getting appropriate sized assignments for my end-user clients with appropriate justification of their needs without them necessarily having existing space from ARIN or any other entity. I know that the ARIN process can, on occasion be tricky to navigate if you don't understand the subtleties of how some of the terminology is defined and that people often use terms which have very specific meanings to ARIN staff members to have a much broader meaning in what they are intending to say. I know that often leads to misunderstandings which make the process even more difficult. Owen
On 4/24/2012 2:00 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Yeah. Let's not forget that if you have 120 management devices (wifi backhaul/switches/waps) and a ton of customers with /32 assignments and you are renumbering from provider assigned space you gathered over many years into your own initial ARIN assignment, they want: 1. equipment type and info for each management device 2. customer info for each /32 assignment Tell me what ISP can legally and ethically give out their customer base information? Don't get me wrong. I'm sure small guys don't think twice about it, accumulating all the information and handing it over to ARIN thinking they have no choice (the responses from ARIN leaves one with that impression; you want the address space, you WILL give us this). I sometimes wonder what happens to that information; if it sits around in an archive somewhere in the vast digital repositories of ARIN awaiting someone to steal it. Jack
On 4/25/2012 12:57 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
The ARIN Privacy Policy covers information submitted for address justifications: https://www.arin.net/privacy.html -DMM
On Apr 24, 2012, at 9:57 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
There is nothing whatsoever wrong with providing the information to ARIN under NDA. ARIN provides a very good (IMHO) plain English mutual NDA for just this purpose. What rational ethical ISP fails to include a provision for this process in their TOS?
I sometimes wonder what happens to that information; if it sits around in an archive somewhere in the vast digital repositories of ARIN awaiting someone to steal it.
That's a very cynical view. I happen to know that ARIN takes the security of that data very seriously and I think they do a good job of protecting it. If you have any reason to believe otherwise, I invite you to offer some form of substantiation to support such a claim. Owen
This is the first time I've seen ARIN request actual individual names. I've had them requests SWIP and I've had them request exact user counts, and I generally get much larger allocations than what was being allocated. In addition, all their numbers matched up with all of my numbers and the allocated space matched what I had assigned them minus 1 /24 (they had 5 /23's from me). After their initial renumber into the /21, they had to return to get the additional /24. They reorganized some networks to squeeze off the tenth /24. On 4/25/2012 10:31 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I sometimes wonder what happens to that information; if it sits around in an archive somewhere in the vast digital repositories of ARIN awaiting someone to steal it. That's a very cynical view. I happen to know that ARIN takes the security of that data very seriously and I think they do a good job of protecting it. If you have any reason to believe otherwise, I invite you to offer some form of substantiation to support such a claim.
I would like to assume they do a good job protecting the data (although I have no proof that this is true). However, leaving unnecessary data laying around for no valid reason is careless. Historical information of customer names/addresses is not necessary, even if said information is provided to ARIN. A note on the account verifying that necessary information was seen by the ARIN representative is enough. Requiring this level of detail on the smallest fraction of the justified space makes it even worse. Of course, ARIN might delete the information. I've seen nothing in the documentation to suggest if they do or not. I never presume data is secure. The more unnecessary copies of it there are, the more likely it will be obtained by an unauthorized individual. Jack
On 4/25/12, Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net> wrote:
Before anyone received their first allocation from ARIN, they had to sign a Registration Services Agreement, which contains a section explaining that ARIN may review Holder's utilization of previously assigned resources to ensure the Holder is complying with the terms, when a transfer or additional IPs are requested. In other words, they have been forewarned, that ARIN may at any time require them to show thorough documentation proving the utilization of the resources, and exactly who or what resources have been reassigned or reallocated to, and eligibility for future resource transfers/allocations may be impacted. If resources are used to provide service to a customer, it is not unreasonable that ARIN require that this to be shown, what customer, etc -- the org. assigning or reallocating the resources is required to have documented this. In addition to this documentation, for reallocations of /29 or more IPs, SWIP or Rwhois is also required by policy. That is all discussed in the ARIN Number resource policy manual, that resource holders have agreed to be bound to by signing a RSA. The requirement to document utilization and maintain evidence for the justification for utilization at all times, does not start when applying for additional resources. The policy is in effect at all times. The requirement is that the justification be made and documented, before resources are reallocated. In short... please don't blame the registry for failure to adhere to the rules and advice "should" rules given in number resource policies by maintaining proper documentation. The ARIN policies are community developed; and the ARIN staff wouldn't be doing their job as steward of scarce IPv4 resources which will be exhausted before too long; if they didn't require sufficient details to prove the utilization in resource reviews for the new allocations. https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four23 " 4.2.3. Reassigning Address Space to Customers 4.2.3.1. Efficient utilization ISPs are required to apply a utilization efficiency criterion in providing address space to their customers. To this end, ISPs should have documented justification available for each reassignment. ARIN may request this justification at any time. If justification is not provided, future receipt of allocations may be impacted. " The requirement for End users is even more stringent: https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four33 " Requesters must show exactly how previous address assignments have been utilized and must provide appropriate details to verify their one-year growth projection. " -- -JH
On 4/26/2012 1:05 AM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
It is unreasonable to require detailed customer information on /32 static assignments which make up the smallest fraction of space compared to the huge blocks of dhcp pools (pools which justify allocations on their own). In addition, a few show commands on a router displaying arp (with first 6 filtered) or ppp sessions (with username filtered) or dhcp pool printouts showing utilization would make much more sense and provide better "proof" of utilization then handing out private resident names of the <10% static /32 utilization pool. For management statics, the same applies. A couple arp table captures generally should provide enough proof of utilization. If ARIN really wants to be uptight about it, they can do what all the vendors do and set up a meeting session to watch us type the commands. This is probably the hardest method to forge. I have not argued about any /29 or greater assignment which should be SWIP'd. Someone else in the thread complained that someone would be vague information in a SWIP concerning a customer, but I see it's still listed under 4.2.3.7.3.2. So the NRPM still apparently recognizes the need for Residential privacy as long as upstream contacts are available to handle abuse/technical contact. I didn't see in the NRPM where SWIP was necessary for /32 assignments, nor that such contact information should be handed to ARIN. This is the difference between NRPM and ARIN implementation of NRPM. ARIN has always asked for dhcp pool counts versus actual customer counts, dialup counts, dialup ratios, etc. They have also always asked for SWIP/records for /29 or larger assignments. I've always been surprised that they don't ask for a few router/server captures as verification. Instead they ask for information which isn't pertinent to justification, the <10% assignments (when the 90% more than justifies on its own). Jack
On 4/26/12, Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net> wrote:
It depends. If you have a healthy mix of assignment sizes and your contact at ARIN is hassling you about the /32's, you may want to ask why he's seeking that information in light of the policy cut-off at /29. If the bulk of your assignment sizes are /32 then I suspect your ARIN contact is really saying: This fits a pattern consistent with careless and poorly tracked assignments which if audited would reveal enough dead assignments to put you in violation of policy. Show us that's not the case. If you have already provided a reasonable demonstration of the actual utilization of your /32's yet you're still getting hassled about identifying those customers that would seem, to my read anyway, to violate ARIN's written policy. In which case I'm confident that ARIN President John Curran would like to hear from you privately. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
On 4/26/12, Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net> wrote:
It is not unreasonable to require detailed information be kept; it is standard business practice to maintain such documentation for support, incident handling, and billing purposes. If that customer stops paying for their service, exactly the right service will be determined. It is also required that exactly the right /32 be de-allocated; the previous customer's use of that /32 can no longer be used to consider the IP still utilized for justifying future allocations, until it is reassigned. If the provider failed to "unmark" that static /32 as utilized in their management system, in that case, it may be ARIN's job to detect the absence of proof of current utilization for those now-unused /32s. The provider is required to maintain that detailed level of documentation, but it is burdensome to publish documentation down to the /32 level, hence, one of the reasons that it is actually not required to RWHOIS or SWIP, unless the allocation is a /29 or larger. That doesn't excuse the provider from maintaining documentation, that ARIN may require at any time, it just reduces the operational burden of constantly updating external databases with single-IP assignments.
to the huge blocks of dhcp pools (pools which justify allocations on their own). In addition, a few show commands on a router displaying arp
Proof implies that you have provided independently verifiable information, that can be used to show that the applicant is providing truthful information. Some "show" commands will show DHCP server usage, but not conclusive proof of the utilization of the address space. Because the show commands are not independently verifiable -- for all the RIR knows, someone plugged in a big stack of $10 modems just to register with the DHCP server. -- -JH
On 4/26/2012 7:09 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
I believe buying and connecting thousands of $10 modems to register with a DHCP server actually constitutes valid use of IP addresses. You would more likely need to create a script to spoof mac addresses in registering with the DHCP server over time to be in violation. Works about like a script that pulls names out of a phone book and assigns them to IP addresses in a report. The difference between the two is that it's easier to make the report than create a good dhcp script that will also utilize bandwidth and multiple interfaces or fill dhcp snooping tables and show up interfaces. The reason I'm completely for skipping all the extra paperwork and going straight to a meeting session is that it's easy to view the various screens depending on the ISP layout to show that a group of addresses are in use and much more difficult to cover all bases to defraud ARIN (not impossible, but much more difficult than forging customer names). Jack
On 4/26/12, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
Hi Owen, John Curran says otherwise. http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2012-April/024518.html http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2012-April/024523.html Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 08:31:44AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
I'm sure that if you s/ARIN/Sony/, s/ARIN/Wordpress/, or s/ARIN/RSA/ (just to name a few), you'd have found people at some point in the past more than willing to stand behind the resulting statement. Just sayin'. - Matt
Negative.. I have never had to provide end user information. I have been required to provide utilization information. I am sure this "policy" is and add-on to make it more difficult to prevent hoarding.. On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Jonathan Lassoff <jof@thejof.com> wrote:
-- Best Regards, Kenneth McRae *Sr. Network Engineer* kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com Ph: 323-375-3814 www.dreamhost.com
There is not a new policy added on to prevent hoarding. What is required is what has been required for several years. Utilization information and proper justification. If you are seeking an ISP allocation, then, reassignment (customer) information is in fact part of that utilization information. Owen On Apr 25, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Kenneth McRae wrote:
I have never provided the names of end users.. How the address space would be utilized? Definitely.. But not the names of end users... On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
-- Best Regards, Kenneth McRae *Sr. Network Engineer* kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com Ph: 323-375-3814 www.dreamhost.com
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Kenneth McRae wrote:
I have never provided the names of end users.. How the address space would be utilized? Definitely.. But not the names of end users...
When I worked at an ISP, we provided the names of companies to whom we assigned address space, but not individual residential subs. Running an rwhois server that was tied into our customer provisioning system made the process of requesting more space from ARIN pretty painless, all things considered, and saved the overhead of having to SWIP every assignment. jms
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com>wrote:
I have never provided the names of end users.. How the address space would be utilized? Definitely.. But not the names of end users...
Probably because you are an "end user". If you're talking about AS26347, I don't think there is any re-assigned space in there. Do you ever "assign" users CIDR blocks of IP space for their own use? If it's just the transitory use of IPs in an operational network you control, then that sounds like "end user" use to me, even though you may sell the use of those IPs. If you have questions about this stuff, the ARIN NRPM is a great resource: https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html Cheers, jof
I got a new allocation about 18 months ago. I sent them a spread sheet of the users and their current IPs. I changed the real customer name to something that reflected what business they were in. So I had lots of "Hotel Customer 1" and "Dr. Office 112" with what IPs they were using. There was no way we were going to release a complete customer list to anyone. They didn't seem to have a problem with this. Richey -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth McRae [mailto:kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:46 AM To: Owen DeLong Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Squeezing IPs out of ARIN I have never provided the names of end users.. How the address space would be utilized? Definitely.. But not the names of end users... On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
-- Best Regards, Kenneth McRae *Sr. Network Engineer* kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com Ph: 323-375-3814 www.dreamhost.com
We just recently "wrastled" with ARIN to get a whopping /22 from them, it wasn't very easy. Keeping record of what you have allocated downstream is important and I totally agree with ARIN insisting this be done. Luckily as long as you have an address, customer name, and a contact, you can issue reassign simples to hostmaster. You don't have to walk your customers through creating POCs and ORG-IDs. When you issue a reassign simple, it will automatically create all that. As long as your allocations are 80% full, you should be able to make a request. You might not get what you want though. Seems kind of counterproductive to ARIN though. I wouldn't think they'd like a database full of fudged SWIP info, but I guess they're OK with it... -----Original Message----- From: Richey [mailto:mylists@battleop.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 13:21 To: 'Kenneth McRae'; 'Owen DeLong' Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: Squeezing IPs out of ARIN I got a new allocation about 18 months ago. I sent them a spread sheet of the users and their current IPs. I changed the real customer name to something that reflected what business they were in. So I had lots of "Hotel Customer 1" and "Dr. Office 112" with what IPs they were using. There was no way we were going to release a complete customer list to anyone. They didn't seem to have a problem with this. Richey -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth McRae [mailto:kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:46 AM To: Owen DeLong Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Squeezing IPs out of ARIN I have never provided the names of end users.. How the address space would be utilized? Definitely.. But not the names of end users... On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
-- Best Regards, Kenneth McRae *Sr. Network Engineer* kenneth.mcrae@dreamhost.com Ph: 323-375-3814 www.dreamhost.com
On Apr 25, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Andy Susag wrote:
Andy - You're 90% right in your quick summary about reassignment data; more details are available here: <https://www.arin.net/resources/request/reassignments.html> If you've got concerns regarding privacy for residential subscribers, there are specific mechanisms for handling that, but otherwise you should be putting in accurate reassignment data (including organization) for each IPv4 assignment of /29 or more. To not do so would be very awkward for you and your customers if your network block were reported for Internet number resource fraud due to being "full of fudged SWIP info"... FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
I can say that I recently completed the purchase of a large IPv6 block. We've had several large V4 blocks for years and got them with very little effort. For this block, we had to provide a detailed list of all our physical locations as well as how the IP schema would be utilized. I also had to provide site drawings (scrubbed visios) showing my topology layout to justify my additional ASNs. It was not a harsh ordeal. ARIN was very professional about it. But it was a lot more paperwork than what I've needed in the past. None of it seemed unreasonable. We just had to work out NDAs and whatnot so I could share more detailed information with them. -Hammer- "I was a normal American nerd" -Jack Herer On 4/25/2012 10:34 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Nope... You paid for and received registration services for a block of IP Addresses. Anyone can use those integers for many purposes, but, only you are registered to use them as topological identifiers on the internet according to ARIN and the other RIRs. Owen On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:59 AM, -Hammer- wrote:
No, you didn't. You may have completed the acquisition of a large IPv6 block, but you did not purchase it. Number resources are not property and cannot be bought and/or sold. What you pay to ARIN pays for registration services (the registration of the numbers, not the numbers themselves). While I realize that in practice this may seem like a distinction without a difference, there are major legal and practical implications to this fact that are quite important to the very underpinnings of how the internet works. Owen On Apr 25, 2012, at 8:54 AM, -Hammer- wrote:
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, admin@thecpaneladmin.com wrote:
Now that we're getting down to the bottom of the IPv4 barrel, the amount of documentation and justification needed to get v4 addresses from the RIRs has increased. Expect any v4 requests to be scrutinized closely. This is not news, and at this point, it should not come as a surprise to anyone. IPv6 address blocks are pretty easy to get ;) jms
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 admin@thecpaneladmin.com wrote:
If you can't [easily] tell ARIN who's using your current IP space, then you're probably not doing a very good job of managing that space, which begs the question, do you really need more? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
On 24-Apr-12 12:32, admin@thecpaneladmin.com wrote:
There are no "end-user allocations". Allocations go to ISPs; assignments go to end-users. Which are you? From the sound of it, you're an ISP requesting an allocation, and ARIN is requesting documentation of the assignments you've made to end users from your previous allocation(s) to verify you really need more--as required by community policy. If you're doing an even marginally competent job of managing your previous allocation(s), this data should be readily available in /some/ form, and providing it to ARIN should require little more effort than pinging your lawyers to verify the appropriate NDA is in place. If you're /not/ doing a marginally competent job of managing your previous allocation(s), you're not going to get more until you learn to do a better job of it. In my experience, going through that learning experience will uncover a lot of unused space that will likely make your current request moot (for now). And that's a big part of the point.
They are insisting that this is standard process and something that everyone does when requesting IPs. Has anyone actually had to do this?
Everyone /should/ be required to provide documentation of justification for all requests to any RIR. If you're aware of anyone who /hasn't/, let us know so we can beat up the RIR in question. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
On 4/24/12, admin@thecpaneladmin.com <admin@thecpaneladmin.com> wrote:
First, distinguish whether you're looking for an ISP allocation or an end-user assignment. If you're an end user then you're not allocating IP addresses to customers. I know you think you are, but trust me: you're not. You're assigning a block of addresses to 20 servers in the computer room and a block of addresses to 50 PCs on the LAN, and so forth. Where you claim servers connected to the Internet, expect to provide a list of current IPs or URLs which you claim will be moved onto the new addresses. You don't plan to use NAT anywhere because real IP addresses are better. Right? And if you have a customer at site B then you're doing the same thing at site B: X servers here, Y desktops there. Not at customer B, at _your site_ B. Also, you're multihoming. You already requested and received an ASN and you've provided a copy of bills from two different Internet vendors both listing your business name and location. Because if you're not multihoming then you have to have many many more computers. So many computers, in fact, that you'd have to be crazy not to multihome. If you're an ISP, the rules are a little different. A few of your addresses will be specified as above but most will be listed as "assigned to Customer XYZ, address, name, phone number." Expect to provide customer name, address, contact name, contact email and phone number. If you don't wanna, you don't get to play at national registry level. Go get IPs from your upstream. For your largest customer assignments, expect to also present some basic documentation of their use in the same form as above: 50 PCs on the LAN, 20 servers in the computer room, etc. Because that's what the customer gave you to justify receiving those addresses. Pursuant to ARIN policy which as an ISP you follow. Right? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
admin@thecpaneladmin.com wrote:
ARIN does not require you or your customers to use NAT. If you have customers, you are an ISP and need an allocation. SWIP everything you do. Produce a common format form that must be completed before any addresses are assigned to anyone. On this your fortitude will be tested without end. Justifiable, documented and responsible utilization is rewarded with additional resources (for the next 1-4 years), so give your customers what they can document their need for. Joe
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Chuck Anderson wrote:
I would think so, but it might also depend on how the space is delegated to you. The upstream should be able to put a note in the rwhois record stating that further assignments from a.b.c.0/xx have been SWIP'd or something to that effect. jms
Owen DeLong wrote:
RWHOIS is a perfectly valid alternative to SWIP.
Owen
I actually got RWHOIS working a while back. But then faced with the prospect of loading it up, I decided that ARIN templates were actually easier to use. And with their restful interface, even more so. Unless it is all prerolled for your and bundled with your ip management software that you are already using, dont bother. Joe
It is an extremely rare ISP that has an rwhois server, and then ensures that it remains available, up and answering queries. And even rarer when the ISP ensures that its rwhois records are up to date and not hopelessly stale. On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Joe Maimon <jmaimon@ttec.com> wrote:
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
Actually, most of the ISPs I know that use RWHOIS instead of SWIP do so tying the RWHOIS server into their IP management database through an automated process (if not just live queries). However, you are right that most ISPs use SWIP. Owen On Apr 26, 2012, at 7:02 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
They do, they do .. but there's all kinds of rwhois unfortunately. suresh@frodo 07:41:38 :~$ telnet rwhois.level3.net 4321 Trying 209.244.1.179... ^C [keeps timing out] suresh@frodo 07:48:17 :~$ telnet rwhois.hostnoc.net 4321 Trying 64.191.49.26... Connected to rwhois.hostnoc.net. Escape character is '^]'. %rwhois V-1.5:003fff:00 rwhois.hostnoc.net (by Network Solutions, Inc. V-1.5.9.5) [not particularly up to date] compared to, for example - suresh@frodo 07:47:13 :~$ telnet rwhois.cogentco.com 4321 Trying 66.28.3.252... Connected to plebe.sys.cogentco.com. Escape character is '^]'. %rwhois V-1.5:0010b0:00 rwhois.cogentco.com [fast, works great, accurate] suresh@frodo 07:47:22 :~$ telnet rwhois.softlayer.com 4321 Trying 66.228.118.79... Connected to rwhois.softlayer.com. Escape character is '^]'. %rwhois V-1.5:003fff:00 rwhois.softlayer.com (by Network Solutions, Inc. V-1.5.9.5) [ditto] On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
On 4/26/12, Joe Maimon <jmaimon@ttec.com> wrote:
Owen DeLong wrote:
RWHOIS is a perfectly valid alternative to SWIP.
The rwhois software from about 10 years ago was very difficult to work with and it periodically crashed to boot. I used it because I already had my allocation data in a handy machine-readable form and could write software which would wholesale convert that database into what rwhois wanted to see. That way I didn't have to write something to detect changes and "update" the SWIP templates. I could just push a completely fresh database into rwhois. Had I needed to import the data by hand, there's no way: I would have used the SWIP templates. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 01:32:17PM -0400, admin@thecpaneladmin.com wrote:
I have. clearly, I should have asked, or looked closer, but when I started this mess? it was not at all clear to me that ARIN saw things that went into a home as 'residential' and everything else as 'business' - but from my reading and their reactions to my questions, that's how they see it. If it's in a data center and not in a residence, you need to give them a name (human or business) for every reassigned IP, even if the reassignment is a /32. Probably the majority of my VPSs? personal use, but not residential. I started with changing the privacy policy, and blogged about it, asking for at least 80% of the people to opt-in. Maybe 2% did. I gave it months, then I emailed everyone, asking them to opt-out. I gave them two weeks, maybe 2% did. So yeah; eh, nobody got mad at me for it, and I think some people were impressed that I emailed them when I made such a large change to the privacy policy (that isn't expected?) so I guess it all turned out okay, but yeah. ARIN wants a name of some sort for every /32. (Now, I just did a query against my billing database and returned the business name and only returned the human name if there was no business name.)
participants (22)
-
-Hammer- -
admin＠thecpaneladmin.com -
Andy Susag -
Chuck Anderson -
David Miller -
Jack Bates -
Jimmy Hess -
Joe Maimon -
John Curran -
Jon Lewis -
Jonathan Lassoff -
Justin M. Streiner -
Kenneth McRae -
Luke S. Crawford -
Matthew Palmer -
Owen DeLong -
Richey -
Robert E. Seastrom -
Stephen Sprunk -
Suresh Ramasubramanian -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
William Herrin