[ARIN-consult] [E] Re: Consultation on Orphaned Organization (Org) and Point of Contact (POC) Records

Fri Aug 3 12:23:31 EDT 2018

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 7:16 PM John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
On 1 Aug 2018, at 2:44 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
|
|
|  Q: Is there a way to keep an orphaned POC from being deleted?
|
|   A: Yes. One of the criteria we are applying is not to remove any locked
records. If you
| wish to prevent a record from being deleted, you may request that it be
locked.

Can I lock and unlock the record through ARIN online?
If yes, can one of the linked accounts lock it and another linked account
unlock it?
If the record is locked, is ARIN online still fully functional?

|
|   Q: Can deleted records be restored?
|
|  A: Not at this time. We have examined the work required to restore
deleted records and
| determined that it would require significant effort to change the system
to allow it.  Keeping
| deleted records permanently deleted also serves as a security measure.
When old records
| are restored, there’s a chance some of that old history could provide an
attack vector.
| Creating a new record allows us to ensure that we are able to obtain the
most current/accurate
| information.  Note that there is likely no significant difference in the
work required to establish
| a new set of records rather than restore old ones. Our current practice
requires annual
| re-verification/vetting of Org records, so even if the record had been
preserved rather than deleted,
| there's minimal difference in terms of what would be required from
organizations.

Does this mean the amount of work a POC or Org would have to do is the same
if the
POC or OrgID was restored as compared to creating a new record?

In what way will the new POC or OrgID differ from the deleted one?
Can it have the same POC handle?  same Org Handle?
Do we just need to re-assert the contact info and re-link with web accounts?
Do we lose access to old tickets of that OrgID? or that POC?
Do we need to re-create new two factor auth and new API-Keys?

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 10:42 AM John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

> On 2 Aug 2018, at 9:30 AM, Stephen R. Middleton via ARIN-consult <
> arin-consult at arin.net> wrote:
>
>
> * From: *<stephen.r.middleton at verizon.com>
> *Subject: **RE: [E] Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Orphaned
> Organization (Org) and Point of Contact (POC) Records*
> *Date: *2 August 2018 at 9:30:24 AM EDT
> *To: *David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu>, ARIN <info at arin.net>
> *Cc: *"<arin-consult at arin.net>" <arin-consult at arin.net>
> ...
> I suspect that we are seeing an uptick in orphaned supporting records
> (Orgs and POCs) relating to the increase in ARIN Fees (account
> consolidations to reduce costs) and the sale of IPv4 addresses where the
> total held assets are transferred.  In both cases we are seeing
> consolidations and centralizations of resources creating more orphans.
>
>
> Steven -
>
> You are correct.
>
> First, it is worth noting that difference between the 1 year and 2 year
> criterion is about when record would be considered orphaned, not with
> regard to the time that the record was created. That means we didn’t have
> 65k records created and then orphaned in a single year. It means 65k more
> records of varying ages would be considered orphaned using the 1 year
> criterion.
>
> Second, the 65k number is driven by the significant increase in specified
> recipient transfers. Any time we complete a specified recipient transfer,
> all reassignment records are removed from the network, and in some cases
> this can be an extremely large number of reassignments being deleted. When
> a reassignment record is removed from the database, the associated Org ID
> and POCs are not deleted unless the upstream ISP conducts separate
> transactions to do so (which almost never happens).  Applying a one-year
> threshold today means that records that became orphaned in late 2016 and
> early 2017 are included in the total count, and that was definitely a
> period of heavy transfer activity.
>
> An analysis of current data shows that of the 497,119 general use Org IDs
> with at least one reassignment in our database today (i.e. simple
> reassignments excluded), 91% have one and only one reassignment. Put
> simply, this means that when a reassignment is deleted (very often due to a
> specified recipient transfer), there’s about a 91% chance it will result in
> orphaned Org and POC records.   Of the 454,090 Org IDs that currently have
> one and only one reassignment, 81,480 (18%) are duplicates (i.e. share the
> exact same organization name with another of the 454,090). While there may
> be differences in street address, contacts, etc, this suggests an
> opportunity on the part of ISPs to examine their SWIP publication practices
> and cut down on duplicate records, which in turn reduces orphaned records.
>
> Hopefully this additional information will provide some insight into the
> present situation with orphaned records, and thus help advance the overall
> consultation discussion.
>
> Thanks!
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Consult
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Consult Mailing
> List (ARIN-consult at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the
> ARIN Member Services
> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>

-- 
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20180803/fe61a5ab/attachment.html>