On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 2:11 PM, David Huberman
david.huber...@microsoft.com wrote:
many angry emails and calls from POCs who are only associated with indirect
resource registration records.
During ARIN's annual Whois POC validation, an email will be sent to every POC
in the Whois database.
Hello,
Richard Jimmerson's Policy Experience Report indicated that 50% of the phone
calls that RSD receives are about POC validation, and that they receive many
angry emails and calls from POCs who are only associated with indirect resource
registration records. In response, I offer the
I think this is a good approach.
I also think we also need to recognize in the problem statement that, by
the time any new policy is adopted, almost everyone qualifying for space
under NRPM 4 will be getting it via transfer. And in a world where
addresses are being obtained on the transfer
Hi Milton,
RIPE NCC membership is open without conditions to everyone. However in
order to receive Internet number resources the member must have a need
in the RIPE NCC service region: the network that will be using the
resources must have an active element located in the region.
The RIPE NCC
Hi Owen,
I can give you a great example that's timely. My company ordered some circuits
from ISP X recently. ISP X has a policy that they only do REASSIGN DETAIL.
They registered the reassignments with POC data that points to a network
engineer who ordered the circuit. It's the way their
ARIN isn’t creating those separate POCs… They are created by CenturyLink or
whoever in the ARIN database.
I would suggest asking CenturyLink or your other providers to use a consistent
contact or find another way to deal with those registrations.
You can actually associate all of those
Hi Ted,
Thanks for the reply.
By indirect resource registration records, I meant reassignment records. ISP
has a /17. They reassign a /28 to a customer, and decide to put customer POC
information on it. That POC only exists because of the /28 - it isn't a POC
for any directly registered
David,
I don’t see the angry phone call as the problem. I see it as a symptom.
The problem is the incorrect registrations. I want us to find out about those
incorrect registrations and resolve them. I certainly don’t want to simply
remove the symptom (angry phone call) by masking the problem
Did ARIN/you consider a consultation instead and simply adding a NACK
button to the confirmation and reassigning the block back to the ISP in
question or re designate to the online account owner? Maybe some of that
needs policy. Maybe not.
You mentioned at the mic that the POC assignments are
On 4/13/2015 5:30 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
If I go to the DMV and register my cat as a driver then get pulled over,
do I have grounds to scream at the DMV for being dumb enough to give a
drivers license to a cat? When it was my foolishness that did it?
The DMV can't fix this anymore
Hello Marty,
Did ARIN/you consider a consultation instead and simply adding a NACK button
to the confirmation and reassigning the block back to the ISP in question or
re-designate to the online account owner? Maybe some of that needs policy.
Maybe not.
[I didn't consider a
On 4/13/15 1:29 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
David,
I don’t see the angry phone call as the problem. I see it as a symptom.
The problem is the incorrect registrations. I want us to find out about those
incorrect registrations and resolve them. I certainly don’t want to simply
remove the symptom
On 15-04-13 06:07 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
- Just as there is a link to confirm the POC record is good, there
should be another
prominent link near the top to say This POC record is bad, and
stop contacting me
- If the POC says their record is bad, And they don't go back and cancel that
On 15-04-13 02:30 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
I know it loads extra work on you guys but it seems to me that providing
a directory of who has IP in use, even if they are a customer of
some larger ISP who is responsible for the IP, is a core function of
a Registrar and I think we need to really
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:23 PM, David Huberman
david.huber...@microsoft.com wrote:
Hi Ted, Thanks for the reply.
complaining en masse to ARIN after receiving POC Validation communications.
My reasoning for removing
POC validation for these types of POCs is that ISPs have the option to not
Hi Milton and others,
I don't generally comment on these sorts of things, and so please excuse
me if this comment is untimely. I have a single comment about your
response to counsel.
On 4/12/15 10:53 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
Counsel asserts:
...if the policy were adopted, ARIN could
Thanks, John, for engaging on the substantive issues. I welcome your response
as part of the needed dialogue.
Counsel is claiming that ICP-2 requires all usage of numbers to be bound to
exclusive RIR service regions
Milton -
Please provide reference for your statement above;
MM: When
So is being announced in the region the same as being used within the
region? What implications does this have for 2014-1?
I think RIPE-NCC does maintain a kind of nominal adherence to service regional,
but a lot of the American companies applying for these resources are requesting
and using
If I understand what counsel is claiming, it is in a way a contrapositive
inference. That is- because ARIN does not assign resources to applicants who
do not have a presence within its region, there is no logical basis for
assertion of jurisdiction beyond that region.
MM: I thought we had
19 matches
Mail list logo
