Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests

[dga at cs.cmu.edu (David Andersen)]

On Apr 20, 2009, at 7:39 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
> We're running out of IPv4 space.
>
> Knowing that blatant lying about IP space justifications has been an
> ongoing game in the community, ARIN has decided to "do something"  
> about
> it.
>
> So now they're going to require an attestation.  Which means that they
> are going to require an "officer" to "attest" to the validity of the
> information.
>
> So the "officer," most likely not being a technical person, is going  
> to
> contact ...  probably the same people who made the request, ask them  
> if
> they need the space.  Right?
>
> And why would the answer be any different, now?

Just a thought:  A technical person might be very happy to lie to a  
toothless organization that holds no real sway over him or her, won't  
revoke the address space once granted, and for whom the benefit of  
lots of address space in which to play exceeds any potential pain from  
being caught, er, exaggerating their need for address space.

That same technical person might be less inclined to lie to a director  
of their company who asks:  "Are you asking me to attest, publicly and  
perhaps legally, that this information is correct?  If you're wrong  
and you make an ass of me, it's going to be yours that goes out the  
door."

Seems like a reasonable experiment to try, at least.

   -Dave
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20090420/1ab6789d/attachment.bin>