[ppml] Revocation

Ron da Silva ron at aol.net
Thu Feb 20 15:20:30 EST 2003

On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 02:36:40PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Agreed.  I think abuse needs to be defined for this purpose through the
> RFC or BCP process in the IETF and incorporated by reference by ARIN.
> In this way, there is an internet definition of abuse, which ARIN (and
> hopefully other RIRs) simply facilitate the enforcement by providers.

I like this approach.

> If they have an ASN, they have a maintainer record...

Is this always true?  Are there ASNs from other sources or pre-ARIN
assignments, or direct assignments from IANA or other source that
do not have a maintainer.  Would it be easier to have the policy
applied only to maintainers then instead?  Also, then the definition
of abuse (see above) will need to make sure that it is maintainer
associated rather than ip address based.

> Whether they are a member or not, they are a maintainer...

Just to be clear, what do you mean by a maintainer?  Do you mean
an OrgId?  or something else here?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list