RWHOIS, SWIP, and proving ownership

Consider this a side note to the preceding discussion.

1. Most of our clients understand that their ''lease'' on network address
   space is at our whim, by contract for IP connectivity, and is subject
   to renumbering if WE assign them new space, if WE are assigned new space,
   or if they move elsewhere.

   Therefore they don't ask us to SWIP the nets nor do they care.

So...

2. RWHOIS doesn't run on any production operating system. I know Unix is
   in vogue, but since we do the 99.96% uptime schtick, we use operating
   systems that stay up (VMS). This means we can't run RWHOIS (even if we
   did want to, which if you read #1 above you'll see we don't.)

I don't see any reason you couldn't modify RWHOIS to compile/run on
VMS. It's pretty straightforward C code with very few UNIX specific
calls in it. Admittedly, we run UNIX (which has been up 99.96%+ at
our site). In fact, the last time I worked in a shop with a bunch
of VMS users, the VMS system was down alot more often than our UNIX
systems.

Oh well... Guess it's religion.

3. We currently use almost all of a /18, two thirds of a /19, a few /22s,
   and some /24s. It would be easy to justify a /17 based on all this, but
   if someone wanted to be rigid about RWHOIS and SWIP, even a bunch of
   traceroutes aren't going to convince them.

Back in THE GOOD OLD DAYS (tm), we said "Be flexible with what you accept,
be rigid with what you send out." (Others made it sound better and put it
in RFCs... D.C. for one.. :slight_smile:

That applies to network protocols and interactions between machines.

Nowadays I see the motto has become "Be rigid in what you accept, and modify
your templates as often as possible." This criticism applies equally to the
RA IRR as it does to the InterNIC.

I will support this criticism of the NIC, but the RA has not refused any of
my submissions based on templates over a year old.

Gee, and this started out as one sentence that went "We don't run RWHOIS, our
clients don't want it, our operating system won't support it, and you better
listen when we ask for a /17 ;)"

We don't conform to any standard, we don't care what the rest of the net does,
and you better give us what we want when we want it. Cute. I expected better
from you of all people, Ehud.

Ehud

Owen