<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFCC">
agreed.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/26/2012 11:30 AM, Patrick Klos
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:508AAC7D.1060504@klos.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Andrew Koch wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAN0k1Ygh8FoUjRJvisTOY9iD=p8Kp6q1RZf1Uwb3iLF=sGSVDg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Yesterday during the open mic at the policy meeting, Mike Joseph of
Google had planted an idea of making Admin and Tech contacts private.
Rather than being able to move all Admin and Tech contacts to being
private, I would be in favor of requiring one public POC of each type
be visible. However, additional POCs of those types could be marked
private.
This would provide for the ability to move all but a select
representative or role account to receive communications into a
private status. These private POCs could continue to manage
resources. It also balances the concern that POCs may receive a large
bit of unwanted communications and the need to contact them.
As I think about this a bit further, creating a role POC and then
being able to link multiple ARIN Online accounts to that role POC is
already available. This would meet the ability to manage resources,
but not place personal details in the public database. So, I think
further information on the drivers of this are needed.
In some after-meeting discussions, another thought that was brought
forward was moving the ability to view certain POC data to a
restricted system. For example, in public whois, the resource would
link to a POC name, but the details (name, phone, email) would be only
accessible after logging into ARIN Online, or using REST with an API
key.
Regards,
Andrew Koch
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
These ideas of hiding POCs are ridiculous! What is the purpose of
a
"point of CONTACT" if you cannot use it to CONTACT someone?!?!<br>
<br>
I constantly use POCs to try to notify resource owners that their
resources (usually a server on their network) have been
compromised and
are behaving badly (i.e. hosting phishing sites or
viruses/trojans). I
don't get paid to do it - I do it because it needs to be done. If
more
obstacles are put in my way (i.e. requiring me to use various web
interfaces and log in to get the details I need), I will have less
and
less time to help out the community.<br>
<br>
What are people worried about that they feel their POC information
should be "private"?? <br>
<ol>
<li>A little spam?!? I get so little spam on my POC email
addresses,
it's silly to worry about it! <br>
</li>
<li>What else? Privacy?? Businesses (legitimate ones, anyway)
have
no reason to hide themselves! </li>
</ol>
What good is a "private" POC? Who would ever got to use it if
it's
private???<br>
<br>
Can someone come up with a single legitimate example of why they
should
have public Internet resources assigned to them, but their contact
information should be hidden from the world??<br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
Patrick Klos<br>
Klos Technologies, Inc.<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>
Please contact <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>