[arin-ppml] (no subject)

Warren Johnson warren at wholesaleinternet.com
Mon Dec 7 13:32:29 EST 2009

Moving into a more private system signals a shift from the grass-roots,
free-love philosophy (that has been the cornerstone of the movement) to a
more private, closed, profit-driven/motivated system. 


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Chris Engel
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 12:09 PM
To: 'arin-ppml at arin.net'
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] (no subject)

John Curran wrote:

" and in fact, AcmeI has agreed by contract to be reachable for network
operations purposes.  In fact, AcmeI has the very same provisions in their
contract with HostingCo, and HostingCo has (at least in theory) a person
reachable via cell for handling their server issues.  AcmeI also wants to
make sure that HostingCo's subdelegation is very visible to the community,
so that the first call goes to the party which is most likely to be able to
solve the problem. "

John, obviously it's in the ISP's interest to do as little work there as
possible, in order to reduce thier operating costs. On the other side of the
coin, one of the reasons why customers choose one service provider over
another is the level and type of services they provide to thier customers. I
would think that who's information goes in the technical contact field would
be something to be worked out individualy between the block-holder and thier
service provider(s) at each level in the chain. Since there is no "one size
fits all" solution that would cover well all (or even a majority) individual
cases.  In EITHER case, however, I am still curious as to WHY anything more
then Technical Contact Phone # & E-mail is REQUIRED to be published in order
to achieve the desired end?

Currently SWIPS/WHOIS collects and publishes far more information then that,
does it not?  None of which would be neccessary or particularly useful for
the purpose of getting in touch with some-one that can act upon the
technical issues at question.

I mean how is it neccesary/useful for some-one to know that Block X is owned
by ACME Corp at 123 South Main Street, if the entity who is ACTUALY
responsible for handling technical issues for them is Computer Consultants,
Inc ?

I would think that the information that would be required to address the
issue would be...

IP Address #: x.x.x.x
Tech Contact E-mail:  abuse at ComputerConsultants.com Tech Contact Phone:

Why is there a need to publish anything more then that?

Christopher Engel

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list