[arin-ppml] ARIN actions regarding address blocks with no valid POCs (was: Re: Deceased Companies?)
David Farmer
farmer at umn.edu
Sat Aug 6 18:50:49 EDT 2022
ERX: Early Registration Transfers mostly happened a long time ago or
shortly after LACNIC and AFRINIC were created. See the following;
https://www.arin.net/vault/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_X/PDF/erx.pdf
On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 17:24 Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
> Once more, nobody cares about those because they are _in use_.
>
> Interesting that there's a handful of legacy space in other RIRs. I
> hadn't thought about transfers. However I don't believe transfers
> can happen unless they sign an LSRA so they are "in the system" at that
> point.
>
> Ted
>
> On 8/6/2022 2:19 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
> > Just a point of clarification.
> > ARIN is not the only RIR with legacy blocks.
> > Check ARIN ERX Transfers.
> > Every RIR has them, and has similar policies regarding them.
> > There are some significant differences related to transfers of legacy
> space.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > *From :* Ted Mittelstaedt[mailto:tedm at ipinc.net]
> > *Sent :* 8/6/2022 4:10:28 PM
> > *To :* lee at dilkie.com; pmcnary at cameron.net
> > *Cc :* arin-ppml at arin.net
> > *Subject :* RE: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN actions regarding address blocks
> > with no valid POCs (was: Re: Deceased Companies?)
> >
> > Nobody not even me is suggesting that. What I am saying is that the
> > ARIN community has that power.
> >
> > Ted
> >
> > On 8/6/2022 11:25 AM, Lee Dilkie wrote:
> > > The legacy blocks were created and in existence before ARIN took
> > > responsibility of them and while ARIN could simply take them all back,
> > > with no regard for history, it smacks of "colonialism" to me. You
> know,
> > > where the enlightened civilized folks take property from the savages
> > > because they can put it to better use. Those savages aren't even
> paying
> > > tax (arin fees) so really they should have no rights at all.
> > >
> > > See? That's how history repeats itself.
> > >
> > > -lee
> > >
> > > On 2022-08-06 11:45, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > >> That is correct which is why John has repeatedly stated that action
> on
> > >> these needs to originate with the community. Essentially the RIR
> > >> system's legal support and basis for power is the same as the United
> > >> Nations various subcommittees such as WIPO - general consensus among
> > >> members.
> > >>
> > >> ARIN is the only RIR that has legacy blocks so this is a unique issue
> > >> with just the ARIN RIR. Most of the rest of ARIN such as NRPM is
> used
> > >> as a pattern by the other RIRs.
> > >>
> > >> It is likely that what the community does with regards to the legacy
> > >> blocks will have an effect on the "deceased company" issue but the
> > >> simple reality with registered blocks, which John has tried to get
> > >> people to understand, is that as long as an entity is paying the
> > >> renewal fees, while it might be apparent that the block is "on
> > >> autopilot" and is not in use/being sat on/etc. and that is incredibly
> > >> irritating, the existence of ongoing payments and ongoing claims that
> > >> the block is "in use" by the payor and the existence of the original
> > >> contract between the entity and the RIR, all of that establishes a
> > >> legal right to continue to have the registration, by that entity.
> > >>
> > >> If ARIN acts without consensus among the community, then it
> > >> jeopardizes the entire RIR system. We don't want the UN coming in
> and
> > >> taking it all over and the UN doesn't want to do that as long as the
> > >> RIR system appears to be functioning on consensus.
> > >>
> > >> The gray line is what constitutes legitimate operations of the RIR
> and
> > >> where is the line between that and operations that cannot happen
> > >> without consensus to modify the NRPM. I have argued in the past that
> > >> ARIN has enough authority by the NRPM to houseclean - John's
> statement
> > >> a few days ago contradicts that - which means as John said if we want
> > >> ARIN to take a broom to the legacy blocks, we have to give them more
> > >> authority to do so by modifying the NRPM.
> > >>
> > >> The actual truth is that if the community was united it could revoke
> > >> all legacy blocks tomorrow despite whatever legalities people out
> > >> there would argue. Ultimately it all comes down to what the major
> ISP
> > >> networks would accept, just because a RIR says a block is assigned to
> > >> someone else doesn't mean all the major ISPs are required to adhere
> to
> > >> that. In practice the major ISPs do because they prefer this over
> the
> > >> chaos that would result otherwise, but ultimately all a legacy block
> > >> is, is a checkoff in a database in ARIN. Nobody HAS to actually
> > >> follow it.
> > >>
> > >> We could vote in power to ARIN to revoke and they could do it. It
> > >> would be a hellofa mess and absolutely the wrong thing to do - but
> the
> > >> community absolutely does have the power to do it.
> > >>
> > >> Beyond that, absence of a proposal, it's all talk and no action. So I
> > >> guess if I want to see anything done I have to get cracking on a
> > >> proposal.
> > >>
> > >> Ted
> > >>
> > >> On 8/4/2022 7:42 PM, Paul E McNary wrote:
> > >>> If I understood what John clarified for me earlier in this thread
> ...
> > >>> Many of the Legacy blocks will not be under NPRM and ARIN has to
> > >>> tread very carefully on trying to claw these addresses back.
> > >>> Many blocks that might be abandoned fall into legacy, especially
> > >>> /24's, assigned pre-ARIN.
> > >>> As always, many times I understand incorrectly.
> > >>>
> > >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>> From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm at ipinc.net>
> > >>> To: "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net>
> > >>> Cc: "arin-ppml" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> > >>> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 9:30:36 PM
> > >>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN actions regarding address blocks with
> > >>> no valid POCs (was: Re: Deceased Companies?)
> > >>>
> > >>>> Ted -
> > >>>>
> > >>>> To my knowledge, the Number Resource Policy Manual (NRPM, i.e.
> > >>>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/
> > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/>
> > >>>> < https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/>
> > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/>> ) does not presently
> > >>>> provide for ARIN performing reclamation of address blocks assigned
> > >>>> to an
> > >>>> organization that has no valid POCs – it provides that such
> > >>>> organizations "will be unable to access further functionalities
> within
> > >>>> ARIN Online” and cannot be receiving organization for a
> > reallocation or
> > >>>> detailed reassignment. (NRPM 3.6.5 and NRPM 3.7 respectively)
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Technically an org like LT is obtaining a detailed reassignment from
> > >>> whatever ISP they are using (most likely, it's a /29) Of course,
> they
> > >>> probably don't even realize or remember that they have a prior
> > >>> allocation which according to the NRPM needs valid POCs and also
> needs
> > >>> to meet utilization requirements before they were supposed to get
> > >>> their /29
> > >>>
> > >>> But, like I said, they aren't bad people, just likely ignorant of
> what
> > >>> they have. I suspect ARIN could take care of this by directly
> > >>> contacting them based on 3.6.5 and 3.7. I also suspect that is the
> > case
> > >>> for a lot of the abandoned stuff. I do agree it would take a LOT of
> > >>> manpower and lacking clear direction from the community to do it is
> > >>> probably a big sticking point for ARIN which is why you are hinting
> a
> > >>> policy change is needed.
> > >>>
> > >>>> If you’d like ARIN to take particular action on address blocks
> with no
> > >>>> valid POCs, please propose policy specifying the actions for
> community
> > >>>> consideration and potential adoption.
> > >>> As you know, the main reason the POC validation was put into NRPM
> > was to
> > >>> allow ARIN to require POC validity, so that it would discourage
> > spammers
> > >>> and other criminals from trying to hide themselves behind fake
> names if
> > >>> they registered blocks, and it would make it possible to alert block
> > >>> holders who had bad citizens acting from IPs in their blocks.
> > >>>
> > >>> It was the "license plate" argument, that is, just like a car they
> are
> > >>> using a public resource, so the public has a right to know who they
> > are,
> > >>> which is why we slap license plates on cars. Even though that
> really
> > >>> pisses off some people.
> > >>>
> > >>> But a secondary reason was to try to get a handle (no pun intended)
> on
> > >>> the extent of the "abandoned resources" problem. Along with
> validation
> > >>> came a requirement for ARIN to report. Well, it's certainly been
> long
> > >>> enough to get some valid data back - could you, John, say now,
> based on
> > >>> that data, what percentage of IPv4 number resources in ARIN are like
> > >>> this particular one - they have only invalid POCs and no valid ones?
> > >>>
> > >>> While those resources might not be available for use (as their orgs
> > >>> might be using them internally and just not kept up with the
> reporting
> > >>> requirements) if you could give us a percentage, if it's high enough
> > >>> it might stimulate the community to support additional requirements
> for
> > >>> having ARIN get a bit more activist on getting these resources back.
> > >>>
> > >>> I sort of liken this to the "abandoned car" issue in a major city.
> If
> > >>> the numbers of abandoned vehicles in a city are below .0001% then
> the
> > >>> population does nothing, but if it increases to .01% or .1% the
> > >>> population goes ballistic and starts demanding the city start
> towing,
> > >>> because the public wants it's street parking space back.
> > >>>
> > >>> So the question is, what are we leaving on the table? I think that
> was
> > >>> the thrust behind the very first query on this thread.
> > >>>
> > >>> Frankly I DO think we should seriously consider revoking
> registrations
> > >>> of number blocks that lack valid POCs. In this day and age, asking
> a
> > >>> number block holder to supply a valid POC is the absolute LEAST
> > that the
> > >>> community can ask. It's not enough to have just a valid street
> > address.
> > >>> It is after all, year 2022. Having an email address is NOT a
> > barrier
> > >>> to anyone. If they are a small org they can just duplicate most of
> the
> > >>> info in the main number block into a POC and add a phone number and
> > >>> email address. It's not a hardship. If they are large then a
> street
> > >>> address of some main corporate HQ is useless if anyone needs to
> contact
> > >>> an individual about something going on from their IP addresses.
> > >>>
> > >>> Ted
> > >>>
> > >>>> You can find more information on
> > >>>> submission of policy proposals here -
> > >>>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/
> > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/>
> > >>>> < https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/>
> > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks!
> > >>>> /John
> > >>>>
> > >>>> John Curran
> > >>>> President and CEO
> > >>>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
> > >>>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> ARIN-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:
> > >>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> > >>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> ARIN-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:
> > >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> > >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ARIN-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:
> > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20220806/1c18ea8c/attachment.htm>
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list