Of course, we declined. I just thought it was worth posting so others might be alerted that this was going on.
Hadn't known about the google page ranking SEO, but it makes sense On Mar 8, 2012, at 8:06 PM, "George Michaelson" <g...@apnic.net> wrote: > > no. you misunderstand. > > The value proposition is not spam: that works with unallocated space. > > The value proposition is gaming google page rank, by using widely spread and > legitimately routed IPs to force your paying customers page rank high, by > hits and references. This is a very high value business: one customer paying > you big bucks, to have their web high in google pagerank. Not attacking a > million mailboxes. > > In this model, the 'target' is google. The IPS need to come from classic, > widespread IPs because google now count the source IP and can tell if you use > a virtually hosted single IP to try and do this. > > I have a question: are we actually able to state this consumption of address > is 'illegal' ? I personally judge it to be unethical, but that is not the > same thing. > > -George > > PS since this goes to address policy, I need to declare that I work for an > RIR but I am posting in a personal capacity and nothing I say is a reflection > of any RIR address policy. I work in the research department, not in > registry/allocations
