<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16705" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>If the
POC e-mail address is heavily filtered then it defeats the purpose of having a
POC</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>e-mail
address.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>If you
are in favor of </FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>180 days, then why not simply support th<SPAN lang=EN>e
"whois POC e-mail cleanup" proposal</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN>since 180 day turnaround is pretty much equivalent to not having any
turnaround at all, and don't</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN>support "Annual WHOIS POC Validation"</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN></SPAN></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN></SPAN></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN>Ted</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN></SPAN></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=873032817-26082008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN></SPAN></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Aaron
[mailto:dudepron@gmail.com] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 26, 2008 8:22
AM<BR><B>To:</B> Ted Mittelstaedt<BR><B>Cc:</B> Kevin Kargel;
arin-ppml@arin.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Annual
WHOIS POC Validation<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>And how is that any different then what you have had to deal with
over the past 10 years? Email isn't the only option. There are other tools
available to help in these situations. Your email might be getting filtered
for one reason or another.<BR><BR>I'm for changing it to 180 days. ARIN sends
out bills to current members, mostly via email. Since those bills do get paid,
then someone is getting those emails. <BR><BR>Aaron Dudek<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:tedm@ipinc.net">tedm@ipinc.net</A>></SPAN>
wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid"><BR><BR>>
-----Original Message-----<BR>> From: <A
href="mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net">arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net</A><BR>>
[mailto:<A
href="mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net">arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net</A>] On
Behalf Of Kevin Kargel<BR>> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 12:59
PM<BR>> To: <A
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A><BR>> Subject: Re:
[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Annual WHOIS POC
Validation<BR>><BR>><BR>> Even 180 days would not be excessive
considering we are<BR>> dealing with a situation that has existed for
decades<BR>> already. Another six months is not going to tip the
canoe.<BR>><BR><BR>The whole point of having an e-mail address on the POC
is in<BR>case there is a problem with the addressing, it allows
other<BR>admins on the Internet who are suffering the ill effects of<BR>the
troublesome IP range to e-mail the holder of the range and<BR>get them to
fix the problem.<BR><BR>180 days turnaround time for me e-mailing an address
holder<BR>because he has an attacker who has hijacked those ranges and<BR>is
DDoSing me to death, it totally unacceptable and is making<BR>a mockery of
the requirement for address holders to have<BR>current contact
info.<BR><BR><BR>Ted<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>PPML<BR>You
are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<BR>the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List (<A
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A>).<BR>Unsubscribe or
manage your mailing list subscription at:<BR><A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR>Please
contact <A href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</A> if you experience
any issues.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>