[ppml] Policy 2002-5

[jlewis at lewis.org]

Which blacklists?  Blacklists come and go, and are too numerous and 
transient for the RIR's to try to notify them each time IP space is 
reassigned.  If any such effort is made, it would make more sense to make 
net reassignment info available via HTTP in an easily parsable format, and 
then just hope the various "players" take notice and perhaps automate 
periodically checking this info and taking appropriate action.

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Taylor, Stacy wrote:

> Okay - is there a way to involve principal players from the blacklists in
> this discussion?  Seems like they should be aware we are addressing the
> issue......
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John M. Brown [mailto:john at chagres.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 2:35 PM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] Policy 2002-5
> 
> 
> Is there a way to have the blacklist remove the block ?
> 
> RIR's have no control over blacklists.
> 
> Thus if a blacklist feels the blocks are just being laundered
> they will keep them on the list.  
> 
> Then you have blacklists that don't remove today, even after
> the ISP was most active and zapped the offender.  
>  
> > Is there a way to inform the blacklists that a block has been 
> > returned to the registry and should be removed from the list?
> > 
> > Stacy
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dawn Martin [mailto:dawn.martin at wcom.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 1:55 PM
> > To: 'Taylor, Stacy'; 'Trevor Paquette'; ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: RE: [ppml] Policy 2002-5
> > 
> > 
> > I'm not sure that returning a larger block of address space 
> > for a slightly smaller block is enough reason to accept the 
> > exchange. Is there a way for the ARIN staff to ensure that 
> > the space is "clean". I don't know of a easy way of doing 
> > this, even over time the blocks stay on lists long after the 
> > original SPAMer is gone.
> > 
> > Dawn Martin
> > WorldCom IP Planning & Policy Analyst
> > dawn.martin at wcom.com
> > (703)886-4746
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On 
> > Behalf Of Taylor, Stacy
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 3:04 PM
> > To: 'Trevor Paquette'; ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: RE: [ppml] Policy 2002-5
> > 
> > 
> > The block an organization would exchange would be for a 
> > smaller block only. The goal is for organizations to turn in 
> > space they are already not using, or could free up by consolidation.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Trevor Paquette [mailto:Trevor.Paquette at TeraGo.ca]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:27 AM
> > To: ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: RE: [ppml] Policy 2002-5
> > 
> > 
> > much better reading...
> > 
> > could this policy possibly be used to exchange blocks?
> > 
> > meaning.. get one of the SAME size because the original is 
> > getting 'dirty' (blocked by blacklist etc?). I hope that the 
> > wording "shall receive a smaller block", really means a 
> > SMALLER block; not one of the same size.
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of 
> > > Taylor, Stacy
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 12:14 PM
> > > To: 'ppml at arin.net'
> > > Subject: [ppml] Policy 2002-5
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Greetings All,
> > > 
> > > To make good on my campaign promise to make our policies
> > > comply with the
> > > standards of the English language, I have altered policy 
> > > 2002-5.  How do you
> > > like this?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > If an organization, whether a member or non-member, ISP or 
> > end-user, 
> > > relinquishes a larger block of portable address space to ARIN, they 
> > > shall be
> > > allowed to receive a smaller block, /24 or shorter, in 
> > exchange.   The
> > > organization will not be required to justify their use of the
> > > new, smaller
> > > block.  The organization must return the block to be 
> > > exchanged within 12
> > > months.  ARIN staff shall, at their discretion, determine 
> > whether the
> > > smaller replacement block shall be a subnet of the returned 
> > > block, or a
> > > block allocated from some different range. 
> > > If any of the relinquished blocks had associated maintenance 
> > > fees, then the
> > > new block will be subject to the appropriate fees for that 
> > block size.
> > > Likewise those without maintenance fees shall remain so.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I am also interested in continuing the discussion on the
> > > relative merits of
> > > this policy.
> > > 
> > > Hope you had a great Thanksgiving!
> > > Stacy
> > > 
> > 
> 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jon Lewis *jlewis at lewis.org*|  I route
 System Administrator        |  therefore you are
 Atlantic Net                |  
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________