[arin-ppml] Reclamation of Number Resources
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Thu Jul 14 09:15:13 EDT 2022
In message <DAC2BB8B-F3F6-48B6-ADD3-A28B241CA489 at arin.net>,
John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On 14 Jul 2022, at 7:36 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
> 1) I cannot, in all honesty and good conscience, report something as
> "fraud" where the set of pertinent facts, as I have elaborated them,
> *do not* suggest that there has been any fraud, deceit, or
> misrepresentation of any kind, at least not on the part of the member
> organization in question.
>If you are correct in your assertions, then the organization will have made a
>representation of significant connection to the ARIN region in order to be
>issued number resources (despite having no such connection)
No. I have asserted that the most likely explanation for the facts at hand
is that ARIN simply made a mistake and never checked if this member had any
substantial connection to the region.
What evidence, if any, have you got to the contrary? Why are you attempting
to shift blame to this member when it seems altogether apparent that the
fault lies only and entirely with ARIN staff?
I mean any competent 10 year old could have googled the street address of
this member and thus quickly and easily established that its footprint in
the ARIN region was utterly superfluous. So does ARIN need to hire some
fresh-faced new competent 10 years olds to perform new member vetting?
Or can we all safely assume that performing -actual- and meaningful
vetting on new member applications has just never been a task that ARIN
has been at all keen to undertake, in practice?
> 2) I could perhaps just be mis-remembering now, but it is my recollection
> that the last time I inquired about the nature of any possible follow-up
> which ARIN might undertake upon its conclusion of any investigation of
> any case submitted via ARIN's fraud reporting form that neither the
> original reporter, not the ARIN membership, nor the ARIN community,
> nor the public at large would ever be informed of the results of any
> inquiry that had been trigged by a fraud report submitted to ARIN.
>ARIN issues quarterly summaries of the results of investigation into fraud
>This reports are not detailed as they nearly always represent a matter which is
>legal in nature and pending final determination.
Yes. And any mistakes that ARIN staff may have made, as in this case, will
then become burried in and among this singular all-pervasive wall of silence.
You'll forgive me if I note the obvious fact that this must be terribly
convenient for you and the staff. If you folks ever mess up, no one need
ever find out, and you have the means, the motive, and the opportunity to
insure that no one ever will.
I feel sure that I could probably find a few billion other people who only
wish that they could so effortlessly bury the mistakes they make while doing
> 3) The case of 1337 Services LLC (SL-206), which I have gone to some lengths
> to carefully research and document, raises a host of other questions and
> concerns about ARIN's ability and willingness to enforce existing
> ratified policies. It is my feeling that you, John, as CEO, should
> openly address these concerns and questions, and not simply endeavor
> to bury them all behind the opaque wall of silence that would seem to
> be ARIN's formalized "fraud" reporting process.
>ARIN will not publicly discuss details of specific requests for number
You're dodging the questions John. I have mostly asked a number of very
generalized questions which have nothing specifically to do with this
specific member or with this specific case, to wit:
*) Has ARIN avoided enforcement of policy against some members out of fear,
warranted or otherwise, of litigation?
If not, then please specify how many members have had their memberships
revoked OTHER THAN in cases of non-payment of fees and/or cases of
outright, blatant, and legally actionable fraud (e.g. Micfo)?
*) How many more memberships are currently sitting on ARIN's books that,
as in this case, obviously should never have been there, and what
effort, if any, will ARIN now expend to find them and to terminate
the memberships involved?
*) In light of the facts of this case, what will ARIN now do to strengthen
the vetting process, going forward, for new memberships?
It is really astonishing that you find it so easy to be quite so cavalier
in the way you have simply ignored these questions. But I guess you have
that luxury, given that the whole system of review seems to be rigged in a
manner so as to insure total unaccountability for any and all staff mistakes
in policy enforcement.
It probably doesn't hurt also that 99% of all ARIN members are entirely blaise
when it comes to the topic of policy enforcement generally. But I guess you
could just call me old-fashioned. I have this old school belief that if
an organization is going to go to all the trouble to write down a set of
policies, then it really ought to take them seriously.
That quite clearly DID NOT HAPPEN in the case of 1337 Services LLC (SL-206).
Even the name of this LLC is a taunting hacker joke, aimed at any and all
authority, including, it would seem, ARIN. They hacked the ARIN vetting
process alright, and it does not aoppear that they even had to break a
sweat in order to do so.
More information about the ARIN-PPML