[ppml] Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2003-3

[Michael.Dillon at radianz.com]

>Note that this policy has no size limit, so, depending on the
>"residential" customer and the willingness of the upstream to condone
>abuse and risk blacklisting, it doesn't put much of an onus. 

As far as I am aware, no ARIN policy places any onus directly
on the recipients of a reassignment. The onus is only on the
organizations who have a direct relationship with ARIN, namely
the ISPs. In this policy proposal, the onus *IS* being put
on the ISP, or upstream, to include correct contact information
for the ISP's abuse and technical contacts. Those are the people
with the ability to take direct action to stop abuse, e.g. disconnect
the customer, and they also have access to the customer's identity,
location, service provided, billing and payment history, etc.

>As written,
>it is a blank check for abuse.

ARIN doesn't write checks for abuse so how can they write a blank one.
ARIN is not the Internet police and ARIN is not the Internet court. 
If an anonymous residential customer of an ISP does bad things to 
your network and the ISP will not resolve the matter, then you should
go to the real police and/or sue that ISP in the real courts.


--Michael Dillon