From sdean at bard.edu Mon Nov 3 11:51:26 2008 From: sdean at bard.edu (Stewart Dean) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:51:26 -0500 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. Message-ID: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this seems to be the new thing....I guess they figure that this way they'll get someone, since these addresses are explicitly listed, where abuse@ is one of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always incarnated Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do things, but everyone is adopting it. It's fortunate that I made the contacts symbolic aliases (iptech, ipadmin, ipbill) instead of actual people's names. At least this way we can send it to multiple people...otherwise, if it was going to an actual user, we'd have to rely on that person to fwd..........which wouldn't happen when they were on vacation. -- ==== Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the floor, and bars on the windows.... ==== Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, Bard College, New York 12504 sdean at bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: 845-758-7035 From sethm at rollernet.us Mon Nov 3 12:16:21 2008 From: sethm at rollernet.us (Seth Mattinen) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:16:21 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> Message-ID: <490F31E5.5050806@rollernet.us> Stewart Dean wrote: > I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our > ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this seems to be > the new thing....I guess they figure that this way they'll get someone, > since these addresses are explicitly listed, where abuse@ is one > of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always incarnated > > Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do things, but > everyone is adopting it. > Really? I've always use a network's abuse contact to report abuse rather than random domain names, especially in the case of spam where the domain is usually forged anyway. ~Seth From farmer at umn.edu Mon Nov 3 12:23:33 2008 From: farmer at umn.edu (David Farmer) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:23:33 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> Message-ID: <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> I looked up your Org entry, you should add an Abuse POC handle, you only have an Admin POC Handle and 2 Tech POC Handles. By not having an abuse handle your not telling people that you want abuse complaints sent somewhere else. Without an Abuse POC I would probably send abuse complaints to your Tech POC Handles, because if you don't publish your abuse contact information why would I assume you even have one? I suspect if you publish an Abuse POC you will see abuse complaints go there. "Abuse POC Handle: Indicate the ARIN POC handle of a contact responsible for handling operational aspects of the acceptable or appropriate uses of the allocated network. The abuse POC may not make modifications to the allocated network registration. " On 3 Nov 2008 Stewart Dean wrote: > I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our > ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this seems to be > the new thing....I guess they figure that this way they'll get someone, > since these addresses are explicitly listed, where abuse@ is one > of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always incarnated > > Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do things, but > everyone is adopting it. > > It's fortunate that I made the contacts symbolic aliases (iptech, > ipadmin, ipbill) instead of actual people's names. At least this way we > can send it to multiple people...otherwise, if it was going to an actual > user, we'd have to rely on that person to fwd..........which wouldn't > happen when they were on vacation. > > > -- > ==== Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, > neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. > Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty > pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the > floor, and bars on the windows.... > ==== Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, Bard College, New York 12504 > sdean at bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: 845-758-7035 > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. ======================================================= David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu Office of Information Technology Networking & Telecomunication Services University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815 2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818 ======================================================= From tedm at ipinc.net Mon Nov 3 13:36:42 2008 From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 10:36:42 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> Message-ID: <79A1A1C002844870B5FCFE681061B88D@tedsdesk> > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Stewart Dean > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 8:51 AM > To: arin-ppml at arin.net > Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. > > > I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our > ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this > seems to be > the new thing....I guess they figure that this way they'll > get someone, > since these addresses are explicitly listed, where > abuse@ is one > of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always > incarnated > > Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do > things, but > everyone is adopting it. > None of our published e-mail addresses go to boneheads. Even the sales e-mail addresses go to employees who we can trust to answer e-mails and forward mis-directed e-mails to the right person. I know of no way to idiot-proof a system if an org insists on staffing with people who you can't trust with a burnt-out match. Nothing implied here about your org, of course. Just a general observation. Ted From sdean at bard.edu Mon Nov 3 13:51:11 2008 From: sdean at bard.edu (Stewart Dean) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:51:11 -0500 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> Message-ID: <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> OK, but. What is wrong with sending something to abuse, if only a copy? This is the canonical forever way to do it, if only a copy; it's in the dad-cussed RFC whatever...not that anybody follows them, gripe, gripe. I know, we don't really need standards, everyone whould just wing it as best he or she sees fit. When I came to make the change from people to symbolic POCs (because our IT head changed), I just updated the the existing POCs individually...there was no abuse POC in our long extant whois listing. It might help if the POC update template from indicated a list of POC roles as a hint. This a gotcha. I *really* try to get things right, and this feels gratuitous. I'll just sit over here in my corner and munch more sour grapes........ David Farmer wrote: > I looked up your Org entry, you should add an Abuse POC handle, you only > have an Admin POC Handle and 2 Tech POC Handles. By not having an > abuse handle your not telling people that you want abuse complaints sent > somewhere else. Without an Abuse POC I would probably send abuse > complaints to your Tech POC Handles, because if you don't publish your > abuse contact information why would I assume you even have one? > > I suspect if you publish an Abuse POC you will see abuse complaints go > there. > > "Abuse POC Handle: Indicate the ARIN POC handle of a contact > responsible for handling operational aspects of the acceptable or > appropriate uses of the allocated network. The abuse POC may not make > modifications to the allocated network registration. " > > On 3 Nov 2008 Stewart Dean wrote: > > >> I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our >> ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this seems to be >> the new thing....I guess they figure that this way they'll get someone, >> since these addresses are explicitly listed, where abuse@ is one >> of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always incarnated >> >> Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do things, but >> everyone is adopting it. >> >> It's fortunate that I made the contacts symbolic aliases (iptech, >> ipadmin, ipbill) instead of actual people's names. At least this way we >> can send it to multiple people...otherwise, if it was going to an actual >> user, we'd have to rely on that person to fwd..........which wouldn't >> happen when they were on vacation. >> >> >> -- >> ==== Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, >> neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. >> Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty >> pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the >> floor, and bars on the windows.... >> ==== Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, Bard College, New York 12504 >> sdean at bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: 845-758-7035 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >> > > > > ======================================================= > David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu > Office of Information Technology > Networking & Telecomunication Services > University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815 > 2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818 > ======================================================= > -- ==== Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the floor, and bars on the windows.... ==== Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, Bard College, New York 12504 sdean at bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: 845-758-7035 From stephen at sprunk.org Mon Nov 3 14:45:20 2008 From: stephen at sprunk.org (Stephen Sprunk) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:45:20 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> Message-ID: <490F54D0.5070304@sprunk.org> Stewart Dean wrote: > When I came to make the change from people to symbolic POCs (because our IT head changed), I just updated the the existing POCs individually...there was no abuse POC in our long extant whois listing. It might help if the POC update template from indicated a list of POC roles as a hint. This a gotcha. > I think you have it backwards. A POC is just a point of contact; the role that each POC fills is not specified in the POC record itself (since a single POC may have multiple roles) but in the record(s) that reference it. If you look at the (IPv4) Network Modification Template, you'll see there's a slot for the (optional) Abuse POC at #7: http://www.arin.net/registration/templates/netmod.txt Ditto for the IPv6 Network Modification Template, also at #7: http://www.arin.net/registration/templates/v6-netmod.txt Ditto for the ASN Modification Template, at #5: http://www.arin.net/registration/templates/asnmod.txt You may find it simpler to specify an Abuse POC for your OrgID, which will be inherited by default for all of your (IPv4) Network, IPv6 Network, and ASN records. If you look at the Organization Template, you'll see there's a slot for the (optional) Abuse POC at #13: http://www.arin.net/registration/templates/org.txt S From farmer at umn.edu Mon Nov 3 15:11:36 2008 From: farmer at umn.edu (David Farmer) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:11:36 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu>, <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu>, <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> Message-ID: <490F0698.5569.EAB3DDB@farmer.umn.edu> I'm sorry, it wasn't my intent to ridicule you, I apologize if you feel I was. Actually, I commend you for following the RFC, you are ahead of many organizations by actually having abuse at ..... But, getting annoyed with people that don't use it when you haven't published it isn't very friendly either. Almost all the Internet Registries, allow for an Abuse POC now, I would recommend that you update all your registrations; Domains, Number Resources, Routing Registry, etc... with an Abuse POC. If nothing else put it in a comment field if for some reason the registry doesn't support an Abuse POC. As others have pointed out the language in RFC 2142 isn't as strong as you would think. I think I hear you saying that this seems redundant to publish Abuse POC info, maybe it is, but it defiantly makes it explicit, which I don't think the RFC does. I recommend you include an Abuse POC, for the most part we only receive abuse complaints at our Abuse POC, but we do occasionally receive them addresses to our other POCs. There is really nothing to be done about that, people are going to do what they do. But, by publishing our Abuse POC which is "abuse at umn.edu" we only rarely get Abuse related complaints to our other POCs. Personally, I think that is it on this subject unless you think that there is some kind of policy needed by ARIN related to this. On 3 Nov 2008 Stewart Dean wrote: > OK, but. > What is wrong with sending something to abuse, if only a copy? This is > the canonical forever way to do it, if only a copy; it's in the > dad-cussed RFC whatever...not that anybody follows them, gripe, gripe. I > know, we don't really need standards, everyone whould just wing it as > best he or she sees fit. > > When I came to make the change from people to symbolic POCs (because our > IT head changed), I just updated the the existing POCs > individually...there was no abuse POC in our long extant whois listing. > It might help if the POC update template from indicated a list of POC > roles as a hint. This a gotcha. > > I *really* try to get things right, and this feels gratuitous. > > I'll just sit over here in my corner and munch more sour grapes........ > > > David Farmer wrote: > > I looked up your Org entry, you should add an Abuse POC handle, you only > > have an Admin POC Handle and 2 Tech POC Handles. By not having an > > abuse handle your not telling people that you want abuse complaints sent > > somewhere else. Without an Abuse POC I would probably send abuse > > complaints to your Tech POC Handles, because if you don't publish your > > abuse contact information why would I assume you even have one? > > > > I suspect if you publish an Abuse POC you will see abuse complaints go > > there. > > > > "Abuse POC Handle: Indicate the ARIN POC handle of a contact > > responsible for handling operational aspects of the acceptable or > > appropriate uses of the allocated network. The abuse POC may not make > > modifications to the allocated network registration. " > > > > On 3 Nov 2008 Stewart Dean wrote: > > > > > >> I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our > >> ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this seems to be > >> the new thing....I guess they figure that this way they'll get someone, > >> since these addresses are explicitly listed, where abuse@ is one > >> of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always incarnated > >> > >> Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do things, but > >> everyone is adopting it. > >> > >> It's fortunate that I made the contacts symbolic aliases (iptech, > >> ipadmin, ipbill) instead of actual people's names. At least this way we > >> can send it to multiple people...otherwise, if it was going to an actual > >> user, we'd have to rely on that person to fwd..........which wouldn't > >> happen when they were on vacation. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> ==== Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, > >> neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. > >> Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty > >> pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the > >> floor, and bars on the windows.... > >> ==== Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, Bard College, New York 12504 > >> sdean at bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: 845-758-7035 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PPML > >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > >> > > > > > > > > ======================================================= > > David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu > > Office of Information Technology > > Networking & Telecomunication Services > > University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815 > > 2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952 > > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818 > > ======================================================= > > > > > -- > ==== Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, > neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. > Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty > pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the > floor, and bars on the windows.... ==== Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, > Bard College, New York 12504 sdean at bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: > 845-758-7035 ======================================================= David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu Office of Information Technology Networking & Telecomunication Services University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815 2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818 ======================================================= From arin-mail at AegisInfoSys.com Mon Nov 3 15:21:32 2008 From: arin-mail at AegisInfoSys.com (Henry Yen) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 15:21:32 -0500 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu>; from Stewart Dean on Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 01:51:11AM -0500 References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> Message-ID: <20081103152132.F31681@AegisInfoSys.com> On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 01:51:11AM -0500, Stewart Dean wrote: > What is wrong with sending something to abuse, if only a copy? This is > the canonical forever way to do it, if only a copy; it's in the > dad-cussed RFC whatever...not that anybody follows them, gripe, gripe. I > know, we don't really need standards, everyone whould just wing it as > best he or she sees fit. My admittedly quickie check only turned up RFC2142 ("Proposed Standard" status) from May 1997; the "abuse@" requirement is a little twisty for me, but I suppose rfc-ignorant.org outlines it best. More apropos, you already know that the ARIN ABUSE contact would do. As well, having an entry in whois.abuse.net (which is probably simpler to parse) is probably helpful. > When I came to make the change from people to symbolic POCs (because our > IT head changed), I just updated the the existing POCs > individually...there was no abuse POC in our long extant whois listing. > It might help if the POC update template from indicated a list of POC > roles as a hint. This a gotcha. Could very well be, but ISTR the ABUSE contact in existence even when the templates were submitted via e-mail. -- Henry Yen Aegis Information Systems, Inc. Senior Systems Programmer Hicksville, New York From jrhett at svcolo.com Mon Nov 3 15:59:43 2008 From: jrhett at svcolo.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 12:59:43 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> Message-ID: On Nov 3, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Stewart Dean wrote: > I am increasingly seeing that abuse-related comments are going to our > ARIN whois info contacts instead of abuse@. ...this seems to > be This is exactly what the (A)buse POC is for. If you register that POC (I don't see one now) you'll stop receiving mail to the other addresses. > since these addresses are explicitly listed, where abuse@ is > one > of the implicitly (by RFC standard) required, but not always > incarnated abuse at domain is bombarded by bots. Our abuse at domain account gets 1-2k messages per hour directly from bots. In contrast, the Abuse POC on ARIN has received only 2, and we nailed those spammers quickly and hard. > Damn. This is one of those expedient, but wrong way to do things, but > everyone is adopting it. No, this is exactly the right thing to do. Assuming you had an (A)buse contact POC. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 From jrhett at svcolo.com Mon Nov 3 16:01:10 2008 From: jrhett at svcolo.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 13:01:10 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> References: <490F2C0E.5060007@bard.edu> <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> <490F481F.7090509@bard.edu> Message-ID: On Nov 3, 2008, at 10:51 AM, Stewart Dean wrote: > What is wrong with sending something to abuse, if only a copy? In which domain? I have an IP. How do I convert this to a domain to tack abuse@ in front of? This is why the Abuse POC exists. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 From famato at infobyte.com.ar Thu Nov 6 15:00:13 2008 From: famato at infobyte.com.ar (Francisco Amato) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 18:00:13 -0200 Subject: [arin-ppml] User's registratations information. Message-ID: Hello List! I'm working in a investigation about pedophilia. We have the firstname and lastname of a person and we have to know all the name of register sites ".com" that this person did from 1999 to 2001. The persons is Argentinan, we need this information because He use some of the name of his victims to use in the site names. We know all the registers site are free now. Anybody know which is the best way and process to get this information? The argentinian goverment is working in the case. Thanks a lot. Regards, -- Francisco Amato http://www.linkedin.com/in/famato [ISR] - Infobyte Security Research Chile 1441 - Segundo Cuerpo - Primer Piso [C1098ABC] Buenos Aires - Argentina Tel: +54 11 43837000 http://www.infobyte.com.ar http://blog.infobyte.com.ar -- The information contained in this message is private and confidential, intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, your are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email an then delete it from your system. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thorsten.ziegler at 1and1.com Thu Nov 6 15:06:11 2008 From: thorsten.ziegler at 1and1.com (Thorsten Ziegler) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:06:11 +0100 Subject: [arin-ppml] Snarl: Using ARIN Contacts to report abuse. In-Reply-To: <490EDF35.4182.E11645C@farmer.umn.edu> Message-ID: <53E2CD30FF6030408E06D9E345DC18A10596E59F@WEBEXCHANGE.webde.local> > I suspect if you publish an Abuse POC you will see abuse > complaints go there. > > "Abuse POC Handle: Indicate the ARIN POC handle of a contact > responsible for handling operational aspects of the > acceptable or appropriate uses of the allocated network. The > abuse POC may not make modifications to the allocated network > registration. " Sadly, I cannot say this is true. While I currently don't know how many people actually honor this, I know that there is a significant amount people who either ignore this handle or don't know about it. The range is big: From private users, cheap free Tools to big business making money by "protecting" against phishing etc. Especially the last party is very reluctant on actually "fixing" anything when contacted, they just keep on ignoring our Abuse Handles. (Cheap) Desktop/Private Protection Utilities are not a lot better... Thorsten From tedm at ipinc.net Thu Nov 6 15:19:58 2008 From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:19:58 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] IPv6 on Linksys RVS4000? Message-ID: <35595DE0EF9947F7BB4BA510A4F02536@tedsdesk> As I was configuring one of these today I noted the device supports IPv6 in it's DHCP server (DHCPv6) It does not appear to support it on it's WAN interface. I suppose this is some sort of progress... Ted From michael.dillon at bt.com Thu Nov 6 16:12:54 2008 From: michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:12:54 -0000 Subject: [arin-ppml] User's registratations information. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Anybody know which is the best way and process to get this > information? The argentinian goverment is working in the case. First go to a judge and get a subpoena (una citaci?n). Then find someone who will serve the subpoena (entregar la citaci?n) in the USA. Verisign is the .com registry operator and they publish the address of their worldwide headquarters on the website under "Contact Us". You might want to start by sending an email asking them where to send the subpoena, but they probably will not provide any data to you unless they have received a subpoena that has been ordered by a judge. --Michael Dillon From farmer at umn.edu Thu Nov 6 17:13:17 2008 From: farmer at umn.edu (David Farmer) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:13:17 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] 2008-4: Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region - Last Call In-Reply-To: <20081023151101.GA35416@ussenterprise.ufp.org> References: <48FF816D.7060207@arin.net>, <20081023151101.GA35416@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Message-ID: <4913179D.32716.4B2B32C@farmer.umn.edu> On 23 Oct 2008 Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:39:25PM -0400, Member Services wrote: > > On 17 October 2008 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC), acting under the > > provisions of the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, > > determined that the community supports this proposal and moves it to > > last call as amended. The AC removed the second bullet from the 4.8.1 > > text because it was redundant, and modified the region to refer to it as > > the Caribbean and North Atlantic Islands. > > At the AC meeting the AC was informed that ARIN staff was going to > update the ARIN web site (specifically > http://www.arin.net/community/ARINcountries.html) to include a group > of countries under the banner "Caribbean and North Atlantic Islands". > The AC chose to use the exact same description as that way the > policy manual and web site would match and there would be a list > of countries, which should eliminate confusion. > > Hopefully the web site will be updated soon so everyone can evaluate > this proposal properly in last-call. It appears that the page has been updated, there is now a CARIBBEAN AND NORTH ATLANTIC ISLANDS SECTOR and it includes ST. HELENA and ST. PIERRE AND MIQUELON in the sector. There are two other sectors listed as well, CANADA SECTOR, and UNITED STATES AND OUTLYING AREAS SECTOR. I thank the AC and staff for resolving these last couple issues. I think this is an excellent resolution to a couple minor issues and nicely clarifies what is included without cluttering the policy itself. Further, I think this eliminates any need for an additional policy to tweak the included islands. I fully support this policy in its last call form. ======================================================= David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu Office of Information Technology Networking & Telecomunication Services University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815 2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818 ======================================================= From jcurran at istaff.org Thu Nov 6 18:06:56 2008 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 18:06:56 -0500 Subject: [arin-ppml] User's registratations information. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7B59E236-E3D5-4A2F-8F02-39F84E7AF23C@istaff.org> Francisco - It's important to realize that this list is for discussion of Internet numbering resource policy, and not domain name registry issues or legal support services. If you have need for support for legal process service on the matter of IP address allocations in the ARIN region, please contact ARIN directly . Thanks! /John On Nov 6, 2008, at 4:12 PM, wrote: >> Anybody know which is the best way and process to get this >> information? The argentinian goverment is working in the case. > > First go to a judge and get a subpoena (una citaci?n). > Then find someone who will serve the subpoena (entregar la citaci?n) > in the USA. Verisign is the .com registry > operator and they publish the address of their worldwide > headquarters on the website under "Contact Us". You might want to > start by sending an email asking them where to send the subpoena, > but they probably will not provide any data to you unless they have > received a subpoena that has been ordered by a judge. > > --Michael Dillon > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From andrea at zchocolat.com Sun Nov 9 06:45:46 2008 From: andrea at zchocolat.com (Andrea Booth (zChocolat)) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2008 12:45:46 +0100 Subject: [arin-ppml] Contact request - Holiday gift solution for American Registry For Internet Message-ID: <20081109054597.SM04608@JPK2> - This mail is in HTML. Some elements may be ommited in plain text. - zChocolat.com Newsletter Greetings, I would like to contact you by telephone to discuss a new business gift solution for American Registry For Internet this year. Could you please reply to this email with a phone number and a convenient time to reach you? I will show you a luxury customized chocolate box handmade in France and delivered to your most important customers in the United States of America for this Holiday season (and worldwide if you have customers abroad). Such personal, exotic and stylish gift solution will impress your most demanding customers and draw attention in there social circle. I am looking forward to your reply. Sincerely, Andrea Booth andrea at zchocolat.com zChocolat.com Corporate Sales 1-800-529-9512 from North America +33 4 42 91 02 61 Outside North America 5 rue Fabrot - 13100 Aix-en-Provence - FRANCE 428 Bryant Circle - Suite 329 - Ojai, CA 93023 - U.S.A. If you do not want to receive emails from zChocolat.com, please click here .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From linda at sat-tel.com Mon Nov 10 08:44:33 2008 From: linda at sat-tel.com (Linda) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:44:33 -0500 Subject: [arin-ppml] Contact request - Holiday gift solution for American Registry For Internet References: <20081109054597.SM04608@JPK2> Message-ID: <3CED5346344C4DABB05E68E507764FA5@Linda> zChocolat.com NewsletterGood Morning, Please do not forward unsolicited e-mail like this on the mailing list. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrea Booth (zChocolat) To: ppml at arin.net Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 6:45 AM Subject: [arin-ppml] Contact request - Holiday gift solution for American Registry For Internet Greetings, I would like to contact you by telephone to discuss a new business gift solution for American Registry For Internet this year. Could you please reply to this email with a phone number and a convenient time to reach you? I will show you a luxury customized chocolate box handmade in France and delivered to your most important customers in the United States of America for this Holiday season (and worldwide if you have customers abroad). Such personal, exotic and stylish gift solution will impress your most demanding customers and draw attention in there social circle. I am looking forward to your reply. Sincerely, Andrea Booth andrea at zchocolat.com zChocolat.com Corporate Sales 1-800-529-9512 from North America +33 4 42 91 02 61 Outside North America 5 rue Fabrot - 13100 Aix-en-Provence - FRANCE 428 Bryant Circle - Suite 329 - Ojai, CA 93023 - U.S.A. If you do not want to receive emails from zChocolat.com, please click here. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrhett at svcolo.com Tue Nov 11 17:55:25 2008 From: jrhett at svcolo.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:55:25 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail> <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> Message-ID: On Oct 29, 2008, at 1:43 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > I don't have a huge staff sitting around to play > paperwork games to make someone else happy, and I have a gut feeling > that in the end it will be people like me and my /22 that will suffer, If you don't have a large staff, then you are more likely to do the work very carefully for all your allocations, right? Because the business interruption from having to do the work outlined in the current RSA isn't something you'd want to face, right? Your current signed RSA says you need to be able to provide documentation on request. You bought into this when you signed the RSA. Don't you have a tracking system that documents that usage internally? Why not? -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 From jrhett at svcolo.com Tue Nov 11 18:00:01 2008 From: jrhett at svcolo.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:00:01 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB30@mail> References: <97617247-B8EA-4F62-BB11-014825BF8A51@svcolo.com><443de7ad0810282115g40dad82ex1ceeafe0a4449eff@mail.gmail.com><70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB16@mail><4908B28D.2050604@rollernet.us> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB30@mail> Message-ID: <27504738-A031-4827-BB81-0DDE64D9AC32@svcolo.com> On Oct 29, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Kevin Kargel wrote: >> I don't understand why basic recordkeeping that any ISP >> should be doing, should not be able to be mandated. I have >> had no problem maintaining an accurate inventory of our IP >> use. I feel confident enough about our recordkeeping to pay >> $20 out of my own pocket for any inaccurate or missing record >> found in our IP database. (This is not a challenge, of course). > > I don't understand why anyone would think they have the right to > tell anyone > else how to admin their network or what tasks they need to do in > order to do > it. I agree that basic recordkeeping is a must but I don't think we > have > the right to make other businesses do things our way. Even if you > religiously balance your checkbook I don't think you would be happy > if they > made not balancing it a misdemeanor offense. Read your RSA. It explicitly says you need to provide this information on request. Now you can either keep good records, or waste a lot of people's time to do it in a hurry on demand. > I applaud you efforts for accurate and timely recordkeeping. I do > not think > it is reasonable that we expect the rest of the world meets your > standards. I believe that it is totally within ARIN's charter to demand that their assignees track their usage well to avoid waste. I support and encourage this effort. I also believe that this is mandated in the RSA today, and you should be paying attention to that. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 From jrhett at svcolo.com Tue Nov 11 18:10:07 2008 From: jrhett at svcolo.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:10:07 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <4909DB68.5070102@sprunk.org> References: <443de7ad0810271152t9cdb2d8n482f7ce4d5cb04cd@mail.gmail.com> <4909DB68.5070102@sprunk.org> Message-ID: <393BB4F2-7993-41B8-B7FA-40F6A0FDD619@svcolo.com> On Oct 30, 2008, at 9:06 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > Other than the period (see below), this is the degenerate case of > 2007-14 -- and fear of that degenerate case is/was a major part of the > opposition to that proposal. Like many others, I object to _all_ > registrants being subjected to this process regularly, regardless of > the > period; it should be up to ARIN staff to decide which registrants > require this sort of attention -- and where ARIN's (read: our) money > is > most efficiently spent. Reviewing all that documentation ain't cheap. I agree that the language might be better changed to indicate MAY instead of MUST. You MAY be subjected to this process not less than once every 12 months. > ARIN is not -- and IMHO should not be -- in the business of levying > fines. The only real enforcement powers ARIN has are (a) refusing to > allocate/assign new resources, and (b) revoking existing resources. I > am very leery of changing that. I absolutely and fundamentally agree with this. Let's stop talking about fines, and start talking about reclamation. >> * The fee for one 12m period shall be waived if the address holder >> ... >> * The fee for one 12m period shall be waived if the address holder >> ... I absolutely disagree with both fees, and tricks to avoid fees. Reclamation is the answer. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 From JOHN at egh.com Tue Nov 11 19:13:14 2008 From: JOHN at egh.com (John Santos) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:13:14 -0500 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity Message-ID: <1081111190315.22676E-100000@Ives.egh.com> On 11 Nov 2008 jrhett at svcolo.com wrote: > On Oct 29, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Kevin Kargel wrote: [Obviously quoting someone else, but the attribution has been snipped] > >> I don't understand why basic recordkeeping that any ISP > >> should be doing, should not be able to be mandated. I have > >> had no problem maintaining an accurate inventory of our IP > >> use. I feel confident enough about our recordkeeping to pay > >> $20 out of my own pocket for any inaccurate or missing record > >> found in our IP database. (This is not a challenge, of course). Not all of us are ISPs. My only documentation of our IP usage is our DNS files. Is that enough? What *KIND* of documentation to they want here, anyway? > > > > I don't understand why anyone would think they have the right to > > tell anyone > > else how to admin their network or what tasks they need to do in > > order to do > > it. I agree that basic recordkeeping is a must but I don't think we > > have > > the right to make other businesses do things our way. Even if you > > religiously balance your checkbook I don't think you would be happy > > if they > > made not balancing it a misdemeanor offense. > > Read your RSA. It explicitly says you need to provide this > information on request. Now you can either keep good records, or > waste a lot of people's time to do it in a hurry on demand. Since I don't have an RSA, this sounds like yet another reason to avoid signing one. > > > I applaud you efforts for accurate and timely recordkeeping. I do > > not think > > it is reasonable that we expect the rest of the world meets your > > standards. > > > I believe that it is totally within ARIN's charter to demand that > their assignees track their usage well to avoid waste. I support and > encourage this effort. > > I also believe that this is mandated in the RSA today, and you should > be paying attention to that. > This argument is only applicable to those who have signed RSAs. -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539 From sethm at rollernet.us Tue Nov 11 19:52:54 2008 From: sethm at rollernet.us (Seth Mattinen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:52:54 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail> <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> Message-ID: <491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> Jo Rhett wrote: > On Oct 29, 2008, at 1:43 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> I don't have a huge staff sitting around to play >> paperwork games to make someone else happy, and I have a gut feeling >> that in the end it will be people like me and my /22 that will suffer, > > If you don't have a large staff, then you are more likely to do the work > very carefully for all your allocations, right? Because the business > interruption from having to do the work outlined in the current RSA > isn't something you'd want to face, right? > > Your current signed RSA says you need to be able to provide > documentation on request. You bought into this when you signed the > RSA. Don't you have a tracking system that documents that usage > internally? Why not? > The system seems to favor entities consuming space and wanting more. I assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, so customer growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I would, the lack of IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't feel it's fair be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with what I have. ~Seth From jrhett at svcolo.com Wed Nov 12 00:15:38 2008 From: jrhett at svcolo.com (Jo Rhett) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:15:38 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail> <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> <491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> Message-ID: On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > The system seems to favor entities consuming space and wanting more. I > assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, so customer > growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I would, the lack > of > IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't feel it's fair > be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with what I have. Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a copy of the justification you used to get the space? Update it to reflect reality and viola, you have everything you need. It probably will take you less time than you have already spent on this thread. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 From sethm at rollernet.us Wed Nov 12 01:17:40 2008 From: sethm at rollernet.us (Seth Mattinen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:17:40 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail> <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> <491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> Message-ID: <491A7504.1000302@rollernet.us> Jo Rhett wrote: > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> The system seems to favor entities consuming space and wanting more. I >> assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, so customer >> growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I would, the lack of >> IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't feel it's fair >> be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with what I have. > > > Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a copy of the > justification you used to get the space? Update it to reflect reality > and viola, you have everything you need. It probably will take you less > time than you have already spent on this thread. > Somebody has to stick up for the tiny networks; might as well be me. ~Seth From kkargel at polartel.com Wed Nov 12 07:37:05 2008 From: kkargel at polartel.com (Kevin Kargel) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:37:05 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com><70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail><4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> Message-ID: <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB98@mail> There is a difference between being able to provide documentation and having to provide documentation regularly according to a timetable on penalty of losing your business.. Figure it out.. > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Jo Rhett > Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:55 PM > To: Seth Mattinen > Cc: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity > > On Oct 29, 2008, at 1:43 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > > I don't have a huge staff sitting around to play paperwork games to > > make someone else happy, and I have a gut feeling that in > the end it > > will be people like me and my /22 that will suffer, > > If you don't have a large staff, then you are more likely to > do the work very carefully for all your allocations, right? > Because the business interruption from having to do the work > outlined in the current RSA isn't something you'd want to face, right? > > Your current signed RSA says you need to be able to provide > documentation on request. You bought into this when you > signed the RSA. Don't you have a tracking system that > documents that usage internally? Why not? > > -- > Jo Rhett > senior geek > > Silicon Valley Colocation > Support Phone: 408-400-0550 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3107 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kkargel at polartel.com Wed Nov 12 07:46:14 2008 From: kkargel at polartel.com (Kevin Kargel) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:46:14 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <491A7504.1000302@rollernet.us> References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com><70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail><4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us><491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> <491A7504.1000302@rollernet.us> Message-ID: <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB9A@mail> You are not alone Seth.. The old school types with ethics will stick up for the small guy and the anarchist.. It is the new types that care only about maximizing short term profit from the internet that are pushing these unnecessary rules. Keep it up.. > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen > Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:18 AM > To: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity > > Jo Rhett wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> The system seems to favor entities consuming space and > wanting more. > >> I assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, > so customer > >> growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I > would, the lack > >> of > >> IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't feel it's > >> fair be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with > what I have. > > > > > > Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a copy of the > > justification you used to get the space? Update it to > reflect reality > > and viola, you have everything you need. It probably will take you > > less time than you have already spent on this thread. > > > > > Somebody has to stick up for the tiny networks; might as well be me. > > ~Seth > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3107 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kkargel at polartel.com Wed Nov 12 07:46:33 2008 From: kkargel at polartel.com (Kevin Kargel) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:46:33 -0600 Subject: [arin-ppml] FW: The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity Message-ID: <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB9B@mail> Jo, If you have enough staff to add unnecessary admin functions then perhaps downsizing would be a better option for you than justifying your job with busywork.. Some of us are busy, some of us are understaffed.. This is the way of the industry and it is how we stay competative.. As I have said before, I do keep records, I *could* provide a report on a moments notice. In the interests of accuracy though an audit should be done before providing reports to ARIN. Without the audit we are just back to making up numbers, which makes the entire exercize worthless. Heck, I can fill out a utilization form with numbers that look good and justify my position without even looking at my database. It sounds like that is what you are promoting, don't take the time to check, just fill in the blanks.. If that is the case then abandon the numbers altogether and just say "Reply to this email".. It would have the same meaning. > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Jo Rhett > Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:16 PM > To: Seth Mattinen > Cc: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity > > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > > The system seems to favor entities consuming space and > wanting more. I > > assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, so customer > > growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I would, > the lack > > of > > IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't > feel it's fair > > be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with what I have. > > > Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a copy of the > justification you used to get the space? Update it to reflect reality > and viola, you have everything you need. It probably will take you > less time than you have already spent on this thread. > > -- > Jo Rhett > senior geek > > Silicon Valley Colocation > Support Phone: 408-400-0550 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN > Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3107 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cgrundemann at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 11:15:22 2008 From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:15:22 -0700 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB9A@mail> References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail> <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> <491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> <491A7504.1000302@rollernet.us> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB9A@mail> Message-ID: <443de7ad0811120815t761f951ew3bacf6f4022fdc5f@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:46, Kevin Kargel wrote: > You are not alone Seth.. The old school types with ethics will stick up for > the small guy and the anarchist.. It is the new types that care only about > maximizing short term profit from the internet that are pushing these > unnecessary rules. I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement. For one thing, the short term profit guys are the ones pushing paid transfers, hard. This (non)proposal is attempting to minimize the short term profit affects and enable a realistic transition to IPv6. It further attempts to keep the system open and not controlled by a few large players who have the money to buy up all that space (where do the small guys and anarchists stand on this?). I wish that this type of rule was in fact unnecessary, but people and organizations are proving that they will not do what is right unless they are paid (somehow) to do it. Lastly, worrying more about the opex required to maintain efficient IP utilization than the good it does for the rest of the community sounds much more like a short term profit focused view than the old-school ethics and anarchy you elude to... > > Keep it up.. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net >> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen >> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:18 AM >> To: ppml at arin.net >> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity >> >> Jo Rhett wrote: >> > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> >> The system seems to favor entities consuming space and >> wanting more. >> >> I assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, >> so customer >> >> growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I >> would, the lack >> >> of >> >> IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't feel it's >> >> fair be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with >> what I have. >> > >> > >> > Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a copy of the >> > justification you used to get the space? Update it to >> reflect reality >> > and viola, you have everything you need. It probably will take you >> > less time than you have already spent on this thread. >> > >> >> >> Somebody has to stick up for the tiny networks; might as well be me. >> >> ~Seth >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >> > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > -- Chris Grundemann www.chrisgrundemann.com From cgrundemann at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 11:23:47 2008 From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:23:47 -0700 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <443de7ad0811120815t761f951ew3bacf6f4022fdc5f@mail.gmail.com> References: <2AF2A084-347B-4E7F-A3F1-1239989744ED@svcolo.com> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB29@mail> <4908CB0E.7010705@rollernet.us> <491A28E6.8030107@rollernet.us> <491A7504.1000302@rollernet.us> <70DE64CEFD6E9A4EB7FAF3A06314106601B4AB9A@mail> <443de7ad0811120815t761f951ew3bacf6f4022fdc5f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <443de7ad0811120823u6fc11fc2w1ef0487e569249c0@mail.gmail.com> sorry, that was allude On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 09:15, Chris Grundemann wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:46, Kevin Kargel wrote: >> You are not alone Seth.. The old school types with ethics will stick up for >> the small guy and the anarchist.. It is the new types that care only about >> maximizing short term profit from the internet that are pushing these >> unnecessary rules. > > I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement. For one thing, the > short term profit guys are the ones pushing paid transfers, hard. > This (non)proposal is attempting to minimize the short term profit > affects and enable a realistic transition to IPv6. It further > attempts to keep the system open and not controlled by a few large > players who have the money to buy up all that space (where do the > small guys and anarchists stand on this?). I wish that this type of > rule was in fact unnecessary, but people and organizations are proving > that they will not do what is right unless they are paid (somehow) to > do it. Lastly, worrying more about the opex required to maintain > efficient IP utilization than the good it does for the rest of the > community sounds much more like a short term profit focused view than > the old-school ethics and anarchy you elude to... > >> >> Keep it up.. >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net >>> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:18 AM >>> To: ppml at arin.net >>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity >>> >>> Jo Rhett wrote: >>> > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: >>> >> The system seems to favor entities consuming space and >>> wanting more. >>> >> I assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, >>> so customer >>> >> growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I >>> would, the lack >>> >> of >>> >> IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't feel it's >>> >> fair be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with >>> what I have. >>> > >>> > >>> > Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a copy of the >>> > justification you used to get the space? Update it to >>> reflect reality >>> > and viola, you have everything you need. It probably will take you >>> > less time than you have already spent on this thread. >>> > >>> >>> >>> Somebody has to stick up for the tiny networks; might as well be me. >>> >>> ~Seth >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >> > > > > -- > Chris Grundemann > www.chrisgrundemann.com > -- Chris Grundemann www.chrisgrundemann.com From tedm at ipinc.net Wed Nov 12 14:54:31 2008 From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:54:31 -0800 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <443de7ad0811120815t761f951ew3bacf6f4022fdc5f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2BD91695DC2143F68EB735EB6B7C4D44@tedsdesk> > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Chris Grundemann > Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 8:15 AM > To: Kevin Kargel > Cc: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:46, Kevin Kargel > wrote: > > You are not alone Seth.. The old school types with ethics > will stick > > up for the small guy and the anarchist.. It is the new types that > > care only about maximizing short term profit from the internet that > > are pushing these unnecessary rules. > > I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement. For one > thing, the short term profit guys are the ones pushing paid > transfers, hard. No. The short term profit guys don't give a fig about paid transfers, because a business model based on paid transfers is not sustainable - there is not enough IPv4 left to satisfy the demand for IP addressing. The short term profit guys care about business models that -regularly- generate money for the forseeable future. Domain registries are a textbook example of short term profit. The guys pushing paid transfers are speculators, they are the same people buying up expired domain names by the hundreds, hoping out of the 100 names they tie up, 2 or 3 will be worth something. Spammers are cut from the same cloth. These people are scum of the Internet and create no value-add whatsoever. > This (non)proposal is attempting to minimize > the short term profit affects and enable a realistic > transition to IPv6. Define realistic transition to IPv6, please. How is keeping IPv4 alive helping this? It's not like we haven't been warned for years. > It further attempts to keep the system > open and not controlled by a few large players who have the > money to buy up all that space (where do the small guys and > anarchists stand on this?). I wish that this type of rule > was in fact unnecessary, It IS! The sooner that IPv4 resources are valueless, the better. > but people and organizations are > proving that they will not do what is right unless they are > paid (somehow) to do it. Your casting a technological decision in moral terms. What is "right"? It seems to me your saying that "right" is to try to prolong IPv4. I'm familiar with the arguments of why keeping the small guys on the IPv4 bottle and pushing the large guys to the IPv6 teat is supposed to be desirable. The fundamental argument is that it allows small cash-poor ISPs to benefit from not having to pay extra to be early-adopters. And, a few years ago this was true, in fact. Today? No! The fct is that the expense of switching to IPv6 is mainly at the CLIENT end, NOT the NETWORK part. And ISP's don't own a lot of clients. Their customers do. And those customers are going to have to pony up the money to switchover to IPv6 if they want to stay on the Internet. And if they want to stay on the Internet with IPv4 only, then they are going to quickly find that no ISP's will be willing to let them do this without charging extra. Ted > Lastly, worrying more about the > opex required to maintain efficient IP utilization than the > good it does for the rest of the community sounds much more > like a short term profit focused view than the old-school > ethics and anarchy you elude to... > > > > > Keep it up.. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] > >> On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:18 AM > >> To: ppml at arin.net > >> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity > >> > >> Jo Rhett wrote: > >> > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:52 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> >> The system seems to favor entities consuming space and > >> wanting more. > >> >> I assume I'll never request more space (I am not an ISP, > >> so customer > >> >> growth has no relation to my usage) or by the time I > >> would, the lack > >> >> of > >> >> IPv4 space will prohibit an additional request. I don't > feel it's > >> >> fair be punished because I'm trying to be responsible with > >> what I have. > >> > > >> > > >> > Seth, get off with the "being punished". Do you have a > copy of the > >> > justification you used to get the space? Update it to > >> reflect reality > >> > and viola, you have everything you need. It probably > will take you > >> > less time than you have already spent on this thread. > >> > > >> > >> > >> Somebody has to stick up for the tiny networks; might as > well be me. > >> > >> ~Seth > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PPML > >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed > to the ARIN > >> Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). Unsubscribe or > >> manage your mailing list subscription at: > >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed > to the ARIN > > Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage > > your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > > > > > > -- > Chris Grundemann > www.chrisgrundemann.com > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > From cgrundemann at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 15:48:02 2008 From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 13:48:02 -0700 Subject: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity In-Reply-To: <2BD91695DC2143F68EB735EB6B7C4D44@tedsdesk> References: <443de7ad0811120815t761f951ew3bacf6f4022fdc5f@mail.gmail.com> <2BD91695DC2143F68EB735EB6B7C4D44@tedsdesk> Message-ID: <443de7ad0811121248l3b33d01cra2ac3aa913f26093@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:54, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net >> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Chris Grundemann >> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 8:15 AM >> To: Kevin Kargel >> Cc: ppml at arin.net >> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:46, Kevin Kargel >> wrote: >> > You are not alone Seth.. The old school types with ethics >> will stick >> > up for the small guy and the anarchist.. It is the new types that >> > care only about maximizing short term profit from the internet that >> > are pushing these unnecessary rules. >> >> I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement. For one >> thing, the short term profit guys are the ones pushing paid >> transfers, hard. > > No. The short term profit guys don't give a fig about paid > transfers, because a business model based on paid transfers is > not sustainable - there is not enough IPv4 left to satisfy > the demand for IP addressing. > > The short term profit guys care about business models that > -regularly- generate money for the forseeable future. > Domain registries are a textbook example of short term profit. Regularly generating money into the future and creating cash today, which has "short term profit" in mind? > The guys pushing paid transfers are speculators, they are the > same people buying up expired domain names by the hundreds, > hoping out of the 100 names they tie up, 2 or 3 will be worth > something. Spammers are cut from the same cloth. These people > are scum of the Internet and create no value-add whatsoever. Agreed (mostly). >> This (non)proposal is attempting to minimize >> the short term profit affects and enable a realistic >> transition to IPv6. > > Define realistic transition to IPv6, please. How is keeping > IPv4 alive helping this? It's not like we haven't been > warned for years. Yes we have been warned for years and that is part of the point I am making below when I say that most (people, organizations, governments, etc) need incentives to do the "right" thing. If everyone (or even some great enough percentage of everyone) had taken the hint(s) and adopted dual-stacked networks and applications over the past years, this conversation would be far less urgent. At this point, AIUI, there is not enough IPv4 addresses left available for a successful transition to IPv6. I would define a realistic/successful transition to IPv6 as one that allows incumbents to continue operating and simultaneously keeps the system open (i.e. a low barrier to entry). In other words, we must maintain open access to the IPv4 Internet until the IPv6 Internet is a truly viable replacement for the community at large (enterprise, education, end user, etc). >> It further attempts to keep the system >> open and not controlled by a few large players who have the >> money to buy up all that space (where do the small guys and >> anarchists stand on this?). I wish that this type of rule >> was in fact unnecessary, > > It IS! The sooner that IPv4 resources are valueless, the better. So lets remove any false scarcity that exists by returning what is not needed and/or not being used. This starts with abandoned space but continues into space that is claimed but not being used; space that is forgotten, inefficiently applied, hoarded or otherwise not truly needed where it currently resides. >> but people and organizations are >> proving that they will not do what is right unless they are >> paid (somehow) to do it. > > Your casting a technological decision in moral terms. What > is "right"? I found that a couple of the definitions from Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary for the word "right" generally fit my meaning: > 10: acting or judging in accordance with truth or fact