# A sad state for VPS offers



## Francisco (Aug 20, 2013)

Anyone else noticing how many people are now pushing the fact that an offer isn't based out of a CC location?

Reason I bring this up is that I saw BlueVM's newest offer and saw the 'NON-CC' tag.

Francisco


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

Link or it didn't happen @Francisco


----------



## Prestige (Aug 20, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Link or it didn't happen @Francisco


http://vpsboard.com/topic/1651-bluevm-now-offering-vps-in-zurich-switzerland-non-cc-exlusive-vps-board-offer/


----------



## Tux (Aug 20, 2013)

BlueVM was already pushing out enough ColoCrossing offers.


----------



## SeriesN (Aug 20, 2013)

When CC provider posts "NOT CC" offer, it makes me feel like they are ashamed of their Dc/provider.


----------



## Francisco (Aug 20, 2013)

Tux said:


> BlueVM was already pushing out enough ColoCrossing offers.


Not commenting on that, just commenting that more and more hosts are using the 'NOT COLOCROSSING' tag on things.

Francisco


----------



## Francisco (Aug 20, 2013)

SeriesN said:


> When CC provider posts "NOT CC" offer, it makes me feel like they are ashamed of their Dc/provider.


That or they're having a hard time marketing.

Francisco


----------



## MannDude (Aug 20, 2013)

I bet Jon will wanna have a little talk with the guy from BlueVM.

"Y u say no CC? "


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

No kidding! Switzerland.  Time for a European summer vacation.

I'll take the credit for this disclaimer, along with uncle drunky.

Yeah, BlueVM got reprimanded once or twice about masking their locations on offers.  They weren't being dishonest.  Just flip flopped some about what the facility was and mostly left then Colocrossing out of their ad descriptions.

I think it's great they note this non-CC location since they are nearly, if not entirely CC based in the US.  Otherwise, the curious would wrongly believe CC had ventured into merry old Europa.


----------



## SeriesN (Aug 20, 2013)

Francisco said:


> That or they're having a hard time marketing.
> 
> 
> Francisco


Not commenting on that.


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

Tux said:


> BlueVM was already pushing out enough ColoCrossing offers.


Problem isn't that.  All their offers are CC based, right?   Some service maybe in Kansas City...  That would be the exception I think in their locations... and this, Switzerland.

People having issues selling out of CC locations.  I won't entirely comment on that.  But I do know of multiple smaller VPS companies that have all but given up on Buffalo.  That location is particularly sparse with sales for more than a few companies.


----------



## BlueVM (Aug 20, 2013)

We aren't having any issues selling out of CC locations, but buffalooed likes us to point out that it is/is not colo crossing (so we do it right out in the open). If you think we're having a hard time making sales you're sadly mistaken. Frankly Francisco ever since we announced Feathur you've been on the defensive and looking for things to point us out on. I'm sure sales will pick up for you soon enough though...

I don't like drama, but come on this is asking for a fight.


----------



## Francisco (Aug 20, 2013)

BlueVM said:


> We aren't having any issues selling out of CC locations, but buffalooed likes us to point out that it is/is not colo crossing (so we do it right out in the open). If you think we're having a hard time making sales you're sadly mistaken. Frankly Francisco ever since we announced Feathur you've been on the defensive and looking for things to point us out on. I'm sure sales will pick up for you soon enough though...
> 
> I don't like drama, but come on this is asking for a fight.


I'm not looking at a fight, you're not the first I've seen with the 'NO CC' comment. In fact Tim made a joke about it on LET 

I just think it's interesting that it's looking to become a norm now.

Francisco


----------



## BlueVM (Aug 20, 2013)

Then just let it be, you don't have to put it on display like it's something we're ashamed of. Frankly if our servers are online, work well and meet our customer's needs that's all that should matter. I only put that on the post because buffalooed and several others have a habit of poking out threads that don't have it in it... get off your high horse (yes its a horse) and stop trying to run the show.

</rant>


----------



## Francisco (Aug 20, 2013)

BlueVM said:


> Then just let it be, you don't have to put it on display like it's something we're ashamed of. Frankly if our servers are online, work well and meet our customer's needs that's all that should matter. I only put that on the post because buffalooed and several others have a habit of poking out threads that don't have it in it... get off your high horse (yes its a horse) and stop trying to run the show.
> 
> </rant>


I didn't say you were ashamed, someone else did. I bring it up because market changes interest me and many others around here. If you don't like it don't put it up (which would make you ashamed).

If anything, be happy you get some extra light on your (I think?) newest location 

Francisco


----------



## mitgib (Aug 20, 2013)

Francisco said:


> In fact Tim made a joke about it on LET


Wasn't that on Skype I made that comment?  Or maybe in a thread on here, I forget, ramble in my old age


----------



## BlueVM (Aug 20, 2013)

Francisco said:


> If anything, be happy you get some extra light on your (I think?) newest location


Well yeah, publicity is always good.


----------



## KS_Phillip (Aug 20, 2013)

Get a room you two


----------



## Francisco (Aug 20, 2013)

mitgib said:


> Wasn't that on Skype I made that comment?  Or maybe in a thread on here, I forget, ramble in my old age


http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/311735/#Comment_311735

You're becoming forgetful in your old age 

Francisco


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

Francisco said:


> I'm not looking at a fight, you're not the first I've seen with the 'NO CC' comment. In fact Tim made a joke about it on LET


Damn LET and drama.   I am fine with everyone here and even if you offer everything off of CC's network.  Really.

I don't think BlueVM is the first to disclaimer the location not being CC.  We all know CC/CVPS has been tip toeing around a Europe location 

Timmeh better be nice.


----------



## concerto49 (Aug 20, 2013)

The first was Inception or someone on LET to advertise non cc.


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

Oh yeah, @BlueVM  you are certainly the first to put 'non-CC' in the offer title 

Freaking pioneering.

Now if we can some other funny offers declaring a change of path.   Like Dewlance now WITHOUT autoboot.


----------



## WebSearchingPro (Aug 20, 2013)

Ive seen this come up more frequently. You know when you read the comments for a VPS post one of the comments is surely "out of ColoCrossing?" Just specifying it straight away takes away those annoying questions on each post.

Having a location not using ColoCrossing sets any company apart at this point.


----------



## MannDude (Aug 20, 2013)

WebSearchingPro said:


> Having a location not using ColoCrossing sets any company apart at this point.


Maybe on LEB, but not so much here. We accept all VPS offers submitted so long as they meet the rules, not because they use / don't use any specific DC.

I think it was a good thing to point out. May be childish, but I personally do not purchase VPSes in any Colocrossing locations. BlueVM operates out of Colocrossing mainly so had I just been skimming and saw the offer I'd not think anything of it. But I see right away it's not CC, so my interest is peaked a bit, especially because it's a unique location.


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

MannDude said:


> I think it was a good thing to point out. May be childish, but I personally do not purchase VPSes in any Colocrossing locations


Every time I see such a disclaimer I want to say wow!  Someone with more restraint than mere old me.

I have two CC locations with service    Backupsy wouldn't stop taunting me and they cut Continuum out so Chicago = CC now.

The other sin in my pile is BuyVM and Buffalo.  Yeah I bought in Cali and that network was stomped on.  When they moved, or were, I setup in Buffalo temporarily (needed US east annual plan anyways).  I've kept it and glad I did pending the new DDoS protection service in NYC.

So when folks think I am hard on CC, it's a case of tough love   The kids from daycare have a pretty good setup.  Not perfect.  The umm games they play, lies, misrepresentations, that sort of stuff, that's the issue there.  If they'd be transparent I wouldn't have much if anything to gripe about.


----------



## wlanboy (Aug 21, 2013)

MannDude said:


> I think it was a good thing to point out. May be childish, but I personally do not purchase VPSes in any Colocrossing locations.


For me it is more like "I don't need another vps at a CC location".



buffalooed said:


> Every time I see such a disclaimer I want to say wow!  Someone with more restraint than mere old me.
> 
> I have two CC locations with service


Me too.



WebSearchingPro said:


> Ive seen this come up more frequently. You know when you read the comments for a VPS post one of the comments is surely "out of ColoCrossing?" Just specifying it straight away takes away those annoying questions on each post.
> 
> Having a location not using ColoCrossing sets any company apart at this point.


Yup, that's true.

In 2012 I really liked the routings and the upstreams CC provided on the east cost. Realy good connections to EU.

I think that we will see more "no CC" statements, because:


There are too many providers trying to sell CC locations. How many vps does someone need in Buffalo?
If I want a second one I will buy it from one of my trusted known hosts.

There are a lot of small hosts that are not able to handle their business or not able to handle CC.
And everytime such a bad host gets bad reviews something sticks on CC too.

CC just stopped to caring about their upstreams. I can't understand why they are not fixing their routing problems. Either the routing to EU or the inner US routing are broken. Looking to the last weeks I would even state both could well be improved.
One last statement:

I really like the Buffalo location. It is a cheap alternative to NY and had better pings to EU than Chicago.

And there are companies like BuyVM and BlueVM that are handling their hardware really well. I am a customer of both comapnies and I see no reasons why I should cancel my services. The uptime of the nodes is way beyond the price tag.


----------



## kunnu (Aug 21, 2013)

Lorem Ipsum http://colocrossing.com/services/cloudservers


----------



## Jack (Aug 21, 2013)

But its not CC... Everyone have a party.


----------



## MannDude (Aug 21, 2013)

Jack said:


> But its not CC... Everyone have a party.


Are your new offers going to say this?


----------



## Jack (Aug 21, 2013)

MannDude said:


> Are your new offers going to say this?


----------



## drmike (Aug 21, 2013)

I have a feeling someone elses company might be posturing the NO CC slogan very soon...   

I welcome it.


----------



## Patrick (Aug 21, 2013)

CC locations are pretty much saturated, mainly Buffalo but some titles are out of hand for example one linked in this thread since CC doesn't have presence in Swiss no need to use it really unless well its a last hope marketing strategy.


We started to use no buffalo - New York City though


----------



## Jack (Aug 21, 2013)

INIZ said:


> CC locations are pretty much saturated, mainly Buffalo but some titles are out of hand for example one linked in this thread since CC doesn't have presence in Swiss no need to use it really unless well its a last hope marketing strategy.
> 
> 
> We started use no buffalo - New York City though


Who would want pure cogent though... Jon is telling me that buffalo is only 27% Cogent that's a load of bollocks.


----------



## SeriesN (Aug 21, 2013)

Jack said:


> Who would want pure cogent though... Jon is telling me that buffalo is only 27% Cogent that's a load of bollocks.


>150 for an e3 with all the goodies and /26 or more? Who wouldn't?


----------



## Jack (Aug 21, 2013)

SeriesN said:


> >150 for an e3 with all the goodies and /26 or more? Who wouldn't?


Someone that doesn't want to end up losing all the clientele?

All the goodies, 4 days on a drive replacement isn't a goodie at all also auto-charging your debit card for an OS install on a new order isn't a goodie either then Chuckles responding with "Sorry should of worn a ski mask".


----------



## SeriesN (Aug 21, 2013)

Jack said:


> Someone that doesn't want to end up losing all the clientele?
> 
> All the goodies, 4 days on a drive replacement isn't a goodie at all.


mehh, you are not losing anyone with those less than coffee money /4gb vps's.. Those who pay like that won't even care 90% of the time about bandwidth. They are just happy to know that they have ram that they will never use.


----------



## drmike (Aug 21, 2013)

True @SeriesN.  Unsustainable pricing unless being funded by some other profit center.  Sliding positive income towards the loss leaders.

No doubt CC is up to something far more sinister at this point.


----------



## Francisco (Aug 21, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> True @SeriesN.  Unsustainable pricing unless being funded by some other profit center.  Sliding positive income towards the loss leaders.
> 
> No doubt CC is up to something far more sinister at this point.


They just need the gear to stay full for however long their ROI is.

Once the equipment is paid off they're making a decent sized profit.

They just got a /15 and there's multiple people, including GVH, offering full /24's bound on a single, cheap ass VPS.

The problem is those markets are just saturated to the max and few are bringing anything new to it short of 'more resources!'

Francisco


----------



## GVH-Jon (Aug 21, 2013)

Francisco said:


> They just got a /15 and there's multiple people, including GVH, offering full /24's bound on a single, cheap ass VPS.


I don't see anything wrong with that?


----------



## Francisco (Aug 21, 2013)

GVH-Jon said:


> I don't see anything wrong with that?


ARIN does 

At the end of the day, ARIN > any of us, including CC.

Francisco


----------



## drmike (Aug 21, 2013)

The IPV4 hording and signing up for space as "providers" and even hijacking allocations is out of control at Colocrossing.

Does ARIN have a standard complaint mechanism about things like this?


----------



## FHN-Eric (Aug 21, 2013)

INIZ said:


> CC locations are pretty much saturated, mainly Buffalo but some titles are out of hand for example one linked in this thread since CC doesn't have presence in Swiss no need to use it really unless well its a last hope marketing strategy.
> 
> 
> We started to use no buffalo - New York City though


I could very easily go contact ocityhosting.com, get a dedicated, and claim not cc.


buffalooed said:


> The IPV4 hording and signing up for space as "providers" and even hijacking allocations is out of control at Colocrossing.
> 
> 
> Does ARIN have a standard complaint mechanism about things like this?


Not that I know of, but at least singlehop, and softlayer can handle IP addresses properly.


----------



## concerto49 (Aug 21, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> The IPV4 hording and signing up for space as "providers" and even hijacking allocations is out of control at Colocrossing.
> 
> Does ARIN have a standard complaint mechanism about things like this?


https://www.arin.net/public/fraud/index.xhtml


----------



## drmike (Aug 21, 2013)

Okay group, for the IP allocation experts (providers) that have clear abuse examples on CC's network, private message me.

This could be many things.  Including offers on nearly free VPSes bundling multiple IPs out of CC.


----------



## RyanD (Aug 21, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Okay group, for the IP allocation experts (providers) that have clear abuse examples on CC's network, private message me.
> 
> This could be many things.  Including offers on nearly free VPSes bundling multiple IPs out of CC.


Nothing in ARIN's policies say you can't "give away" IPs. Thats just a marketing tactic.

You do however, have to ensure that they are justifiable and maintain records of such.  You'll also find that a representative of your organization will also have to sign an attestation that the records are accurate. Falsification of such records is grounds for IP de-allocation. I hope thats not the case here.


----------



## Francisco (Aug 22, 2013)

RyanD said:


> Nothing in ARIN's policies say you can't "give away" IPs. Thats just a marketing tactic.
> 
> You do however, have to ensure that they are justifiable and maintain records of such.  You'll also find that a representative of your organization will also have to sign an attestation that the records are accurate. Falsification of such records is grounds for IP de-allocation. I hope thats not the case here.


Sure. ARIN still wants accurate and justified usage. What happens when they start asking for MAC tables and you have 1000 ip's bound under a single MAC because it's an OVZ node with a bunch of /24's? I know they have at least 1 staffer that doesn't like VPS' at all and kept questioning us if each server *really* needed an IP or if we could just NAT everything.

Francisco


----------



## SeriesN (Aug 22, 2013)

Francisco said:


> Sure. ARIN still wants accurate and justified usage. What happens when they start asking for MAC tables and you have 1000 ip's bound under a single MAC because it's an OVZ node with a bunch of /24's? I know they have at least 1 staffer that doesn't like VPS' at all and kept questioning us if each server *really* needed an IP or if we could just NAT everything.
> 
> 
> Francisco


Sounds like an smart individual tbh though.


----------



## uplinkvps (Sep 23, 2013)

ah ha no CC here, the mighty will fall ( im willing to help that process along too ;-))


----------



## KuJoe (Sep 23, 2013)

uplinkvps said:


> ah ha no CC here, the mighty will fall ( im willing to help that process along too ;-))


How professional and mature of you.


----------



## RiotSecurity (Sep 23, 2013)

Tux said:


> BlueVM was already pushing out enough ColoCrossing offers.


cPanel server of BlueVM(main site):  WSI

KVM Server(for panel): ColoCrossing

HYPERVM Server(for panel):  ColoCrossing (ChicagoVPS)

Yep, defo. not CC at all.


----------



## Magiobiwan (Sep 23, 2013)

Don't forget our Zurich location. That's not ColoCrossing. Our Kansas Location is WSI. We have our servers with ColoCrossing, but that doesn't mean we ARE ColoCrossing.


----------



## RiotSecurity (Sep 23, 2013)

Magiobiwan said:


> Don't forget our Zurich location. That's not ColoCrossing. Our Kansas Location is WSI. We have our servers with ColoCrossing, but that doesn't mean we ARE ColoCrossing.


Okay, pardon me.

The only part of bluevm I like is the main sites hosted on WSI ( http://204.12.2**.**/~bluevm )


----------



## SkylarM (Sep 23, 2013)

RyanD said:


> Nothing in ARIN's policies say you can't "give away" IPs. Thats just a marketing tactic.
> 
> You do however, have to ensure that they are justifiable and maintain records of such.  You'll also find that a representative of your organization will also have to sign an attestation that the records are accurate. Falsification of such records is grounds for IP de-allocation. I hope thats not the case here.


Records required for small allocations are all fairly basic, and there's no "proper" format for justification forms for larger allocations (they typically only inquire relating to allocations larger than /25's, sometimes smaller but rarely from the 3 times I have applied). Information for small blocks/individual IPs is simply a client name, and that's that.

There are "guidelines" to what they want for IP justification, but there's no way for them to validate any of the information.

Edit: Requirements are based off of my experience with an initial application, and 2 ip requests thereafter (I have a /22, a /21, and a /20) - not sure what the process is like for larger allocations.


----------



## willie (Sep 24, 2013)

SkylarM said:


> Records required for small allocations are all fairly basic, and there's no "proper" format for justification forms for larger allocations (they typically only inquire relating to allocations larger than /25's, sometimes smaller but rarely from the 3 times I have applied). Information for small blocks/individual IPs is simply a client name, and that's that.


Wait, do VPS vendors routinely give client names (matched to IP addresses) to ARIN or anyone else?  I'm not doing anything sketchy on any VPS's but I still would have thought this was private info, at least unless there was an actual problem.


----------



## SkylarM (Sep 24, 2013)

willie said:


> Wait, do VPS vendors routinely give client names (matched to IP addresses) to ARIN or anyone else?  I'm not doing anything sketchy on any VPS's but I still would have thought this was private info, at least unless there was an actual problem.


It is required for ARIN IP requests, yes.
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four24



> (C2) For any static assignments to customers, such as leased line, colocation, or virtual private/dedicated servers, list each IP/subnet assigned along with the corresponding customer name.
> 
> (C3) For any shared web hosting platforms, list each IP address used and provide only one customer domain hosted on each.
> 
> (C4) For any internal utilization, list each IP/subnet assigned and the corresponding device name and purpose.


----------



## peterw (Sep 24, 2013)

willie said:


> Wait, do VPS vendors routinely give client names (matched to IP addresses) to ARIN or anyone else?





SkylarM said:


> It is required for ARIN IP requests, yes.
> 
> https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four24


Say hello to the NSA if you are using your own vps for vpn sessions.


----------



## concerto49 (Sep 24, 2013)

peterw said:


> Say hello to the NSA if you are using your own vps for vpn sessions.


You say hello to the NSA anyway. They'll know it regardless.


----------



## RiotSecurity (Sep 24, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> You say hello to the NSA anyway. They'll know it regardless.


hey nsa  boy are your packets looking very sexy today <3


----------



## SkylarM (Sep 24, 2013)

peterw said:


> Say hello to the NSA if you are using your own vps for vpn sessions.


Yeah, the NSA sure gets a lot from your name and nothing more. They just have a list of "John Does" and their IPs lying about and they poke at them from time to time for funsies when they are bored.


----------



## KuJoe (Sep 24, 2013)

It's not the NSA I would be worried about. :X


----------



## willie (Oct 6, 2013)

SkylarM said:


> It is required for ARIN IP requests, yes.
> 
> https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four24


Wow, that is pretty annoying.  What happens for an EC2-like setup, where you spin up a VPS for a few hours?  Does that count as a static address?  Is it possible to get a VPS on such a basis?  Are there VPS address pools that don't come from ARIN?  What about ipv6?  Thanks.


----------



## SkylarM (Oct 6, 2013)

willie said:


> Wow, that is pretty annoying.  What happens for an EC2-like setup, where you spin up a VPS for a few hours?  Does that count as a static address?  Is it possible to get a VPS on such a basis?  Are there VPS address pools that don't come from ARIN?  What about ipv6?  Thanks.


I wouldn't be able to tell you how that works. IPs for a VPS Provider are applied for as an ISP-based allocation, so it follows the same rules as ISP-based allocation requests. ARIN assumes that when you report on an IP block that most of that information hasn't changed so they don't typically ask for more information on older IP blocks. I'd expect a provider that does a lot of spin-up to try and work around that by using the temporary-users that are using the IP space? I wouldn't know for sure.

As far as IPv6 I wouldn't be able to tell you, I applied for my initial /36 and that was it. I'd expect it to function similarly, but different rules as far as allocation inquiry are concerned. (typical with arin is a /25 and greater for further justification).


----------



## willie (Oct 7, 2013)

Thanks, this is creeping me out a bit.  I do a fair amount of web surfing through proxy daemons on vps's, to help stay out of marketing databases and so forth.  I always figured LE or whoever could get my info from the VPS hosts if I were doing something dodgy (which I'm not), but they'd have to at least go out of their way to ask for it. It's not so great if all the info is already turned over to a central location ahead of time.  Sounds like a marketing bonanza to me (among other things).  My home ISP uses dynamic addresses and that suddenly looks more private despite the geolocation.


----------



## DamienSB (Oct 7, 2013)

There are almost no rules on IPv6 - if you are able to get at least 1 IPv4 allocation (/22 or greater) you can get a /32 of IPv6.

Also, ARIN does not give out /36 to ISP's. Only /32’s as per their policy manual.


----------



## KuJoe (Oct 7, 2013)

DamienSB said:


> Also, ARIN does not give out /36 to ISP's. Only /32’s as per their policy manual.


Don't tell ARIN that or I'd owe them a lot more money. .


----------



## DamienSB (Oct 7, 2013)

ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS.

They *refused* to give me a /36 and demanded that i take an entire /32 or zilch.


----------



## DamienSB (Oct 7, 2013)

But to be fair, when we got the IPv6 allocation our anual fee didnt go up. because you dont pay IPv4+ipv6, it is whatever is more.

Now im mad as hell. ima go get hotcakes from mc donalds
 

*grumbles*


----------



## KuJoe (Oct 7, 2013)

If we had got anything larger than a /36 our annual payments would have doubled. A /36 is plenty for our needs since we just assign a /48 per location so a /36 will let us expand to 4000 locations and 268435456 clients which is more than I'll ever need. If we reach 1 million clients or 100 locations I think I'll be hiring somebody else to deal with the networking stuff by then since I hate it. LoL.


----------



## SkylarM (Oct 7, 2013)

DamienSB said:


> There are almost no rules on IPv6 - if you are able to get at least 1 IPv4 allocation (/22 or greater) you can get a /32 of IPv6.
> 
> Also, ARIN does not give out /36 to ISP's. Only /32’s as per their policy manual.


I got a /36 but that's because I was still in that bracket. I prob should have just gotten a /32 though as I'm in that appropriate bracket now. Oh well.


----------



## SkylarM (Oct 7, 2013)

willie said:


> Thanks, this is creeping me out a bit.  I do a fair amount of web surfing through proxy daemons on vps's, to help stay out of marketing databases and so forth.  I always figured LE or whoever could get my info from the VPS hosts if I were doing something dodgy (which I'm not), but they'd have to at least go out of their way to ask for it. It's not so great if all the info is already turned over to a central location ahead of time.  Sounds like a marketing bonanza to me (among other things).  My home ISP uses dynamic addresses and that suddenly looks more private despite the geolocation.


 Keep in mind it's ARIN that is taking first and last name ONLY. No address, no email, nothing else. If you're SERIOUSLY worried about it, ask a provider for an IP in one of their older iP blocks (for example my 162.218 and 162.220 IP ranges would not go back to ARIN with up-to-date information when I fill my 23.XX /20).

TECHNICALLY SPEAKING there is no way for ARIN to validate any of the information, they just use first/last name as a baseline to try and prove that the IP ranges are in use -- if they didn't you'd have tons of companies just applying for new IP blocks and saying "oh yeah it's full, trust us".

Keep in mind that even if a provider is leasing their IP space (say from CC) they still have to provide justification when they ask for larger IP blocks, as CC has to provide this information to ARIN. The policies on this are a bit out in the wind as far as formatting goes, but the basic information would be: http://crissic.net/docs/IPJustification.pdf (this is our form for large IP allocations). While it does not specifically ASK For first/last names a provider could request that information, and then forward it up to ARIN to provide reason as to why you have such a large IP block. All large allocations have to be documented with ARIN and a justifiable reason as to why a company/person is assigned say a /24 instead of a /25. You can't simply say "well because they said they need it" you need some form of documentation saying it's in use.


----------



## peterw (Oct 7, 2013)

SkylarM said:


> TECHNICALLY SPEAKING there is no way for ARIN to validate any of the information, they just use first/last name as a baseline to try and prove that the IP ranges are in use -- if they didn't you'd have tons of companies just applying for new IP blocks and saying "oh yeah it's full, trust us".


Some providers play the game "you get a free vps for 1-3 months" and then assign about 20 ips to the vps. Troublesome if these 20 ips are connected to someones name.


----------

