tedm at ipinc.net
Fri Apr 29 16:46:08 EDT 2011
On 4/28/2011 5:34 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> In message<4DB9C40C.8030004 at ipinc.net>,
> Ted Mittelstaedt<tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
>> On 4/28/2011 12:07 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>>> You comments assume that spam is what causes contact e-mail addresses
>>> to be virtually or actually aliases to /dev/null.
>>> That may be true in some cases, but my guess is that in the vast majority
>>> of cases POCcontact at some.place.tld isn't going to any live humans simply
>>> because the bean counters and the Golden Slacks types have taken over
>>> the world, and reading POC e-mail has been determined not to represent a
>>> profit center, and that thus, dealing with that e-mail has been pushed down
>>> to the lowest level of the work priority queue.
>> The community developed a policy to deal with that. I was one of the
>> instigators of it. ARIN also has a mandate to periodically report the
>> progress made on this. I may criticize ARIN for many things but this
>> is one thing where I will say your going to just have to give it more time.
> My sincere apologies. Apparently I was not clear.
> I, for one, most certainly _DO NOT_ blame or criticize ARIN for the fact
> that many organizations fail to read or respond to their POC contact e-mail
> addresses or phone numbers.
> It is Good that ARIN makes some efforts to try to insure that POC contacts
> are actually reachable, but fundamentally it is just slightly annoying to
> even think that ARIN even needs to be involved at all in the process of
> hearding the unruly collection of cats it has some responsibility over in
> this particular direction.
> I may have other criticisms of ARIN, but I do not criticise ARIN for any
> failure, perceived or real, to cajole or harass resource holders into
> brushing their teeth on a regular basis.
> Quite obviously, the primary responsibility for maintaining a working,
> staffed contact e-mail address and phone number belongs to to the individual
> organizations in question.
> I bemoan the fact that so many are falling down on the job with respect to
> this, but I sure as hell don't blame ARIN for that.
>> ARIN may need prodding to get the abandoned resources reallocated...
> Well, yes. But that is a different issue.
> There are plenty of NON-abandoned resources for which trying to make con-
> tact with someone... anyone... who will take some responsibility for the
> resource is about as fruitful as trying to raise the dead... and at times
> seems roughly equivalent thereto.
Well, do you have any suggestions? Because if the POC's are
communicating with ARIN - which is what the POC verification program
insures - but aren't communicating with you - then maybe they
just don't like you. ;-)
The problem as I see it isn't orgs who are paying fees on addresses
they are rightfully assigned, and just decide to use those to hose
you down. That may be a problem but ARIN should not be involved in it.
The problem is orgs who are using addresses they DON'T own to hose
you down. And if they don't own an IP block then how would VALID
and responding POC's on that block (granted, responding to ARIN)
tolerate some 3rd party org using their numbers without their permission?
It would seem the usual thing would be that the hijacked blocks
have invalid POC's on them, not valid ones. And if that is the case
then ARIN should be able to designate the IP block as abandoned,
and reallocate it for assignment to someone who needs numbers.
Then once that new entity was assigned the abandoned block, and updated
the whois with their correct contact info, it would seem that if the
hijacker was still operating on their block that they would institute
proceedings to stop the problem.
Is there something wrong with my logic here?
> 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