[arin-ppml] Policy idea: POC Validation

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Tue Apr 14 13:09:27 EDT 2015 

Seems to me that the problem in this case is not ARIN, it is the way your particular service provider works.

Choices include:

	1.	Work with your service provider to change their process.
	2.	Change service providers.

What am I missing?

Owen

> On Apr 13, 2015, at 1:36 PM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Owen,
> 
> I can give you a great example that's timely.  My company ordered some circuits from ISP X recently.  ISP X has a policy that they only do REASSIGN DETAIL.  They registered the reassignments with POC data that points to a network engineer who ordered the circuit.  It's the way their system works.  
> 
> The engineer emailed me very angry that her information was in ARIN Whois - and in fact, in Whois many times with multiple iterations of her POC -- POC1, POC2, POC3, POC4, POC5, etc all with the same information pointing to her.   It even included her direct phone number, which happened to be her mobile phone, and she was upset about that.
> 
> Luckily for her, she knew who ARIN was, she knew who the hostmaster was in our company (me!), and I knew how to get it fixed. 
> 
> BTW, in order to get it fixed, I chose to do what I thought was the right thing:  I asked ARIN to "consolidate" the reassignment records into my main OrgID.   ARIN *would not do it* without the explicit written permission of ISP X.  (Luckily for us, ISP X consented.)  
> 
> Hope that helps,
> David
> 
> David R Huberman
> Principal, Global IP Addressing
> Microsoft Corporation
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com]
>> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 1:30 PM
>> To: David Huberman
>> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy idea: POC Validation
>> 
>> David,
>> 
>> I don’t see the angry phone call as the problem. I see it as a symptom.
>> 
>> The problem is the incorrect registrations. I want us to find out about those
>> incorrect registrations and resolve them. I certainly don’t want to simply
>> remove the symptom (angry phone call) by masking the problem (incorrect
>> registration).
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>>> On Apr 13, 2015, at 1:23 PM, David Huberman
>> <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Ted,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the reply.
>>> 
>>> By "indirect resource registration records", I meant reassignment records.
>> ISP has a /17.  They reassign a /28 to a customer, and decide to put customer
>> POC information on it.  That POC only exists because of the /28 - it isn't a POC
>> for any directly registered allocation, assignment, or AS number.   These are
>> the POCs who are complaining en masse to ARIN after receiving POC
>> Validation communications.  My reasoning for removing POC validation for
>> these types of POCs is that ISPs have the option to not register POCs at all --
>> they can choose "REASSIGN SIMPLE" as a path for registering SWIP
>> information, and that doesn't have any POC info. Secondly, I'm not convinced
>> there's a significant value in up-to-date POC information for reassigned
>> numbers.  In the end, the ISP (the direct registrant) is the party responsible
>> for the IP addresses and use.  (And in 90%+ of cases, the ISP is responsible
>> for routing in the DFZ, too.  For the cases where a reassigned block is
>> announced by th
>>> e customer, there's a customer ASN easily found in the routing tables,
>>> and that contact information is more germane than a SWIP record.)
>>> 
>>> I hope that's clearer.
>>> 
>>> David
>>> 
>>> David R Huberman
>>> Principal, Global IP Addressing
>>> Microsoft Corporation
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
>>>> On Behalf Of Ted Mittelstaedt
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:12 PM
>>>> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
>>>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy idea: POC Validation
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As one of the initiators of this policy I must state that none of us
>>>> who worked on this ever assumed the POC Validation Policy would be
>>>> the END of the process.
>>>> 
>>>> The idea was that when a POC was marked invalid, that ARIN would
>>>> institute an investigation into the number resources held by the
>>>> invalid POC and if they did locate the actual holder, they would give
>>>> that holder 30 days to supply valid POC contact info for whois that
>>>> would replace the bogus invalid contact info.
>>>> 
>>>> If the holder wasn't forthcoming, ARIN will delete the POC.
>>>> Resources that have no POC's justifying their existence are then freed up
>> for reassignment.
>>>> 
>>>> If ARIN is not doing this, then it is completely understandable that
>>>> you would be getting large numbers of phone calls from people annoyed
>>>> that their email addresses are still in whois.
>>>> 
>>>> So, ARIN can start doing this and thereby make the people happy who
>>>> are complaining, and at the same time, freeing up resources that are
>>>> held by stale or bogus POC data.
>>>> 
>>>> You said "indirect resource registration records"
>>>> 
>>>> What exactly is that?
>>>> 
>>>> In my opinion, ANY POC that is in whois that is associated in any way
>>>> with an organization or individual who has IP addresses, and is being
>>>> used as justification for holding resources, must remain in the validation
>> list.
>>>> 
>>>> It seems quite obvious and apparent that POCs that ARIN has judged to
>>>> be invalid, and is in the process of investigating, would be calling
>>>> and complaining.  In general people who are doing things they
>>>> shouldn't be doing, don't like to be investigated would certainly would
>> complain.
>>>> That can be solved easily by deleting their records and thereby
>>>> freeing up resources.  Then you don't contact them again and the
>>>> community gets back the IP addressing they have held.
>>>> 
>>>> Does not a POC that is being contacted by ARIN have the right to have
>>>> their information deleted?  If they are calling in and complaining
>>>> that their records are in there, they obviously want them removed.
>>>> So, ARIN can remove them and stop bothering them.
>>>> 
>>>> You need to define the difference between "indirect resource
>>>> registration records" and "associated with an active directly registered
>> number resource"
>>>> before anyone can really make a judgement on this policy proposal
>> change.
>>>> 
>>>> It just seems very simple to me.  If they are a POC they are there
>>>> because their existence is justifying some IP address holding in some
>>>> way, there is some connection.  If their POC is no longer justifying
>>>> an IP address holding and there is no connection whatsoever to an IP
>>>> address holding, then take their POC out and doing so will automatically
>> quit contacting them.
>>>> 
>>>> Ted
>>>> 
>>>> On 4/13/2015 11:11 AM, David Huberman wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Richard Jimmerson's Policy Experience Report indicated that 50% of
>>>>> the
>>>> phone calls that RSD receives are about POC validation, and that they
>>>> receive many angry emails and calls from POCs who are only associated
>>>> with indirect resource registration records. In response, I offer the
>>>> following change to the NRPM :
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Existing text:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 3.6 Annual Whois POC Validation
>>>>> 3.6.1 Method of Annual Verification
>>>>> During ARIN's annual Whois POC validation, an email will be sent to
>>>>> every
>>>> POC in the Whois database. Each POC will have a maximum of 60 days to
>>>> respond with an affirmative that their Whois contact information is
>>>> correct and complete. Unresponsive POC email addresses shall be
>>>> marked as such in the database. If ARIN staff deems a POC to be
>>>> completely and permanently abandoned or otherwise illegitimate, the
>> POC record shall be marked invalid.
>>>> ARIN will maintain, and make readily available to the community, a
>>>> current list of number resources with no valid POC; this data will be
>>>> subject to the current bulk Whois policy.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I propose we make the first sentence read:
>>>>> 
>>>>> "During ARIN's annual Whois POC validation, an email will be sent to
>>>>> every
>>>> POC in the Whois database that is associated with an active directly
>>>> registered number resource."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>> David
>>>>> 
>>>>> David R Huberman
>>>>> Principal, Global IP Addressing
>>>>> Microsoft Corporation
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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.
>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list