[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-2 (Was: Forcing POCs and other contacts to act through a "blacklist")

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Mon May 2 16:05:14 EDT 2011

On Apr 30, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:

> In message <20110430034341.GA68511 at ussenterprise.ufp.org>, 
> Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
> curran>  "Legacy resources that have been abandoned because a company, for
> curran>   example, has dissolved don't really pose a problem."
>> Having personally tracked spam and botnets back to such blocks in
>> the past I know first hand John is incorrect in this statement.
> Leo is more diplomatic that I am.  "Incorrect" is not the word that I
> would have used.
> John Curran knows good and well that there is a problem.  He has simply
> been doing his level best to steer himself and his minions well and
> truly clear of taking any responsiblity for fixing it, or even in-
> vestigating it.
> I am self-admittedly ignorant about a lot of things, and that probably
> includes essentally all of the policy manual.  But I have been led to
> believe that ARIN has basically two responsibilities, to wit:
>    1)  To make allocations, fairly and impartially, according to policy,
>        and
>    2)  to keep an acurate data base of who is using all of the number
>        resources that have been assigned to ARIN and ARIN's region,
>        both legacy and non-legacy.
You are close, but, not quite...

2)	to keep an accurate data base of who has been assigned or
	allocated number resources in the ARIN region either by
	ARIN or its predecessor registries.

> As a result of the recent Nortel/Microsoft deal, some have raised questions
> about ARIN's ability and/or willingness to fulfill its responsibilities to
> do (1).  Based upon what has, apparently, transpired with respect to Leo's
> proposal however, I would like to assert, here and now, my own personal
> disbelief in the notion that ARIN is even seriously comitted to doing (2).
I think part of that comes from the difference between your (2) and
the version of (2) I have stated above. I believe mine to be a more
accurate reflection of ARIN's mission.

However, I do agree that ARIN should be more proactive about
reclaiming abandoned and/or hijacked blocks and I would like
to support policy in that direction.

I think that Leo's policy went a little too far into blank-check land
and that was why I favored abandoning it.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list