[arin-discuss] ARIN billing practice

[John Curran]

Michael -

Thanks for the summary; while some of this is existing practice,  
there's definitely some enhancements to be considered.  I'm going to  
work with the ARIN staff and counsel to consider what can be done to  
make improvements along these lines.

It's important to note that at the time of application, there often is  
zero evidence that such blocks will be misused in the future.  It's  
only after things are assigned, when routing and DNS is setup, that  
the connections begin to appear. At this point, ARIN is not in a  
position to reclaim address space unless the holder stops paying  
bills, or somehow it is shown after the fact that the application  
information was fraudulent.

As many have noted, ARIN reclaiming addresses for any other reason  
could be consider a significant expansion of our mission, and one not  
to be taken lightly.

/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

On Sep 22, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Michael Hasse wrote:

> Been watching the discussion for a bit and thought I'd add 2c to the  
> pot.
>   It seems that the problem revolves around:
> 	- virtually anonymous requests that churn and burn IP blocks.
>   	- how to slow/prevent this without adding an onerous  
> administrative burden to ARIN
>
>
>   So here's a possible solution-set:
> 	- collect, confirm and retain as much information about netblock  
> users as possible, (including archive records of old info if  
> somebody changes it), with a "churn" flag that is set for some  
> number of years whenever a netblock is returned
> 	- cross-reference all information for AS# and netblock requests  
> against the list above and if there is even a single match (POC,  
> tel#, address, whatever...) then:
> 		- flag for review/reject
> 		- put on probation
> 		- delay
> 		- any/all of these or other deleterious actions
> 	- require actual granting of a new AS# (only) to be received by  
> applicant at an actual business address (no residential, no POB)
> 	- prevent carpet-bombing of the above and defray ARIN overhead by  
> charging a reasonable application fee for each submission ($200?)
>
>
>   The issue will never be completely eliminated but this should set  
> the bar a lot higher and force spammers to behave more like  
> legitimate businesses with A - minimal additional ARIN admin  
> overhead, and B - little change to existing process for legitimate  
> customers.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Hasse
> Itwerx
> 206-850-1496
> http://www.itwerx.net/
>
> **********************************
> If our service is not 100% satisfactory please tell us!
> If it is 100% please tell others!
> **********************************
>
> On Sep 22, 2009, at 9:03 AM, Jon Radel wrote:
>
>
>
> Alex Ryu wrote:
>>
>> Also, if somebody is trying to setup bogus company, probably he/she  
>> can setup bogus company registered in local TAX authority any way  
>> using proxy person or some people, who will be much thankful to get  
>> some money out of their name or identity.
>>
>
> Thinking back to my experience forming a Virginia corporation,  
> running it for a bit, and then killing it off, I'd say that in  
> Virginia (since we've already come up in this discussion) if you've  
> got around $150 and the patience to fill out a couple of forms  
> (they're really short) you can have a corporation, EIN (tax id from  
> the IRS), and business license with nobody much caring who the  
> officers are (if anybody who actually exists even) or what you do.   
> If you mess up big time, then, yes the authorities start to care and  
> have penalties for various infractions, but they most certainly  
> don't check anything ahead of time.  If you start to sell shares  
> publicly, then, yes, some new agencies that actual take a look at  
> you enter the picture.  But frankly, if you don't make waves and  
> remember to file a tax return every year, nobody looks at your  
> little private corporation.
>
> Oh, and these days I'm the treasurer of a perfectly legitimate non- 
> profit organization that doesn't need a business license and  
> consequently doesn't have one, though we do have an EIN.
>
>
> So, sorry, but I quite agree that verification of EIN and business  
> license does little other than filter out applications with  
> completely fictional information;  I've always found the ARIN  
> paperwork harder to fill out than the corporation commission or EIN  
> request forms, so I'm not sure this represents a useful barrier.
>
> In any case, without a tight definition of what "bogus company"  
> actually means, I don't see this becoming actionable policy.
>
> --Jon Radel
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>