[AFRINIC-rpd] RE: IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment proposal

[Frank Habicht]

Hi,

On 9/10/2013 11:00 PM, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote:
> "What is very useful for an RIR to have is password controlled access to
> a LIRs MRTG or other monitoring system so that graphs of IPs in use can
> be seen by the RIR staff in order to evaluate additional allocation
> requests."

It would also be very useful for me to get a new car.
What I want to say: not everything that is desirable should be done.

> Since it's classified as very useful, do we port it like:
> 
> "An RIR may ask a password controlled access to a LIRs MRTG or other
> monitoring system so that graphs of IPs in use can be seen by the RIR
> staff in order to evaluate additional allocation requests."

I'd say an RIR may ask for many things.... ;-)

In my opinion an RIR can not make resource allocation dependent on live
access to systems.
Personally I'd be ok to send snapshots of daily/weekly/monthly stats or
concurrent users. But to give full-time live access to that would possibly
allow conclusions when correlating with other events. Sure convenient, and
if both sides agree, fine, but don't make allocations depend on it.


> Now what happens if you uplink your colo customers on their own switches
> /routers  & have an active NDA in force ? Will the RIR be willing to
> sign another NDA ??

I believe an RIR should be able to accept a statement like :
Colo customer 1 has connected network equipment and 20 servers with 200
virtual machines and 280 https hosts, all above using w.x.y.z/23

And I trust this does not need to be in any policy, it just needs to be
implemented in an agreeable way.

I hope resource allocation have never depended on live system access.
It might be the "easiest" way, but most members sure want to rule out that
their next outage will be explained like this: "could have been AfriNIC,
they have access..."


Frank