[arin-ppml] "Millions of Internet Addresses Are Lying Idle"(slashdot)
tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Oct 22 14:19:01 EDT 2008
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Sprunk [mailto:stephen at sprunk.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 10:36 AM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> Cc: 'Jo Rhett'; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] "Millions of Internet Addresses Are
> Lying Idle"(slashdot)
> Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jo Rhett [mailto:jrhett at svcolo.com]
> >> On Oct 21, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> >>> They ARE doing it. Anyone who has allocated space gets a
> bill every
> >>> year. If their contact info becomes invalid, the bill
> then gets returned by USPS and after 6 months or whatever,
> the account goes to collections and the allocated IP
> addressing becomes forfeit.
> >> That is the billing contact, entirely separate from the POC data.
> > So you are saying that ARIN still has entries in it's POC
> database for
> > orgs that paid for allocations then stopped paying for them a few
> > years later when those orgs went bankrupt or otherwise disappeared?
> > I am sure ARIN staff would be most interested in this facinating
> > interpretation of how badly they mis-manage the WHOIS database.
> Interpretation? Mis-management? There was a recent presentations (I
> forget by who) which called out the number of "orphan" POC entries.
You missed Jo's original statement, I'll repost it here:
"...Asking ARIN to
validate POC data for RSA contractees is like reminding the teacher to
show up in class. It is function 1 of their job. Why aren't they
Jo wasn't concerned with orphaned POCs but rather with RSA contractees
that had stale POC data. By definition, an org that isn't paying it's
bill is no longer a RSA contractee. (ie: they have broken their contract)
and ARIN would remove numbering resources allocated to it, thus
"orphaning" all the POCs. I presumed she wouldn't care if orphan
POC data was stale.
> This isn't news, nor is it necessarily bad. Orphan POCs do not cause
> any problems other than taking up a few extra bytes in the database.
Well, actually there is one problem and that is of searching, it makes
it a bit more difficult. A minor one, though.
> However, I don't think that is the problem Jo was referring
> to. That an
> org's Accounts Payable department pays an invoice on time does _not_
> guarantee that all the various POCs listed on each of their
> registrations are still valid.
Both you and Jo are asserting here that ARIN billing addressing info
is separate from the POC info associated with that org. Do EITHER of you
have ANY authoratative statement from anyone at ARIN that states this?
Because if you do, I feel another NPRM policy proposal change suggestion
More information about the ARIN-PPML