On Tue, 6 May 2003 Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
I think that it is time to tighten up on these requirements even further. The published whois directory should only contain the up-to-date contact information of people responsible for enforcing network AUPs and rooting out network abuse. If an organization is allocated or assigned IP space from their upstream then their info should not be published in the whois directory unless they agree to be directly responsible for AUPs and abuse mitigation.
This has got to be one of the worst ideas you've come up with recently. The crack pipe must be pretty warm. This would make every provider like Level3 and Cogent...hosters of spammers camouflaged by a lack of publicly available reassignment data. At least with the current system, most providers publish reassignment data, so when you get spammed by discountdeals or ultimate savings, or the like, you can usually look up their address space and block them. Too many providers just don't care about spam as long as the spammers pay.
In one fell swoop, this will enable people to block just about every possible source of spam.
I assume you mean it would make blocking bogons and unused blocks easier, but I think the net result would be to make it much harder to block most sources of spam.
Of course, none of this will happen unless network operators stop chasing symptoms and start thinking more deeply about the roots of the problem. One of these roots is the lack of a web of accountability for IP address space.
So you want to fix this by making it even harder to find out who's using an IP block? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________