[ppml] Revocation

Ron da Silva ron at aol.net
Tue Feb 18 21:33:02 EST 2003

On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 08:50:37AM +0700, Dr. Jeffrey Race wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:36:09 -0500, Ron da Silva wrote:
> >other conditions.  Certainly if we cannot define (for the
> >purposes of ARIN policy) what SPAM is then we will not be
> >able to create such a policy. 
> See <http://www.camblab.com/misc/univ_std.txt> Sec. 6.

UBE shall mean 

  - messages, regardless of content, sent in multiple similar or 
    identical copies to recipients who did not request to receive 
    such messages from their sender.    

In deciding whether a transmission shall be deemed UBE, common sense 
shall be applied encompassing the totality of facts knowable about the
transmission including subject line, actual content, source of 
addresses, falsification of message parts, use of promiscuous relays 
or proxies or other abusable resources, obfuscation of return path or
true identity of sender, or history of sender's previous abuse as 
recorded in any accessible database.

Ok, suppose we define spam as above.  Now what?  Is there a mechanism
to traceback ARIN resources currently in use by the originator?  (As well
as a clear mechanism to traceback the sender himself!) And then, suppose
we have identified that entity and its ARIN resources but that entity
is not a direct member of ARIN.  What action do you
propose be taken?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list