Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

If enforcement of SWIP would result in the elimination of network abuse, I would not speak against it. However, even with valid contacts in SWIP, abuse reports are ignored. Contacting the ARIN allocation holder also often goes unanswered as well, and this is not dependent on SWIP. In addition

Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

In message <551ebd1d-517e-5fb2-e379-0c45674b1...@linuxmagic.com>, Michael Peddemors wrote: >.. and given the >large increase in nefarious actors on the internet, it is important to >have accurate information on the responsible party for that part of the >internet. >

Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

Ps.. for instance.. NetRange: 23.110.0.0 - 23.110.255.255 CIDR: 23.110.0.0/16 NetName:NETBLK-NOBIS-TECHNOLOGY-GROUP-18 Found a referral to rwhois.nobistech.net:4321. getaddrinfo(rwhois.nobistech.net): Name or service not known Found a referral to

Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

Sorry, I guess for a list like this, simply saying 'Horrible Idea' is not to helpful to the readers, but I for one assumed everyone would 'get it' that 'rwhois' and 'SWIP' and crucial to many involved in the Internet, especially when it comes to security. And of course, ARIN has had a problem