[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 45, Issue 36

[Owen DeLong]

I believe that clearly identifying these blocks in whois so that
organizations that choose to can consider that information in
filtering policy will do more to prevent abuse than to encourage
it.

Owen

On Mar 26, 2009, at 9:48 AM, Brent Sweeny wrote:

> it occurred to me, on reading Ted's note excerpted below, that so  
> identifying
> IPv4 blocks that ARIN believes but can't yet prove are abandoned is a
> wonderful invitation to hijackers--increasing the likelihood of one  
> thing
> you're trying to prevent, while working on another goal of  
> disputable value
> which is coattailed to a goal of undisputed value.  I believe it's  
> fine to
> clean up WHOIS data, and even trying to scrape up every last dreg of
> available v4 space is useful, but it's not going to stem the tide of  
> runout,
> nor will the small relief it offers arrive in time.
>  Brent Sweeny, Indiana University
>
> Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote on 25 Mar 2009 17:51:11
> | SO what we will end up with this policy is the following:
> |
> | a report from ARIN that lists the reclaimed prefixes, and the ones
> | "in dispute" ie: the ones where verification is pending.  Those will
> | be visible in WHOIS by the existence of a "bogus e-mail" mark on
> | the e-mail data in the POC.  We will know that a certain percentage
> | of the "verification pending" ones will turn out to be reclaimed,
> | and so based on that we will be able to make a pretty accurate  
> estimate
> | of how much stale IPv4 is tied up in WHOIS.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.