In this text, I typo'd a cost issue; Net-block cost $1US/month/IP-address. A /24 will cost $256/month, minimum. |> From: Elisabeth Porteneuve [mailto:Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr] |> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 1:58 AM |> The rivers of comments has been sent out about domain |> names, there is a dangereous silence about IP numbers. It is with wry amusement that I have been following the MAPs debate, on NANOG, recently. Then you make this comment, it couldn't dove-tail more beautifully. Those that do not know what MAPs is, please review http://www.mail-abuse.org/. The fundimental function is to create blacklists used for various filtering of IP blocks. While this sounds innocuous on its face, MAPS has recently announced intention of charging for their service, in order to raise money for legal fees (they are under legal attack). Until now, Paul Vixie has been the main funder of MAPs. The problem is that MAPS was distributing the lists and there were many local copies, within places like EarthLink and AOL. As long as those copies are maintained by MAPS, this is not a serious problem. They have an efficient and timely distribution mechanism. The result of an net-block being listed in MAPS is that entire chunks of the Internet cannot reach that net-block. This is done at the provider level. The effects are global in that they over-ride ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC. The problem arises when there are stale entries in the black-list. In fact, the danger has always been, the issue of stale entries. The effect, given MAPS market-share, is that a net-block can be issued, to a new business, that may be perfectly useless and neither the ISP or the business knows about it until it is too late. I might point out that a similar problem can occur with DNs, so it is not entirely an PSO issue. There are now stale entries, in abundance, because many providers are still evaluating the new cost issues. Meanwhile, they have disconnected from the distro system and aren't having their black-lists updated. Ergo, they have stale entries. What this, in effect, does is to over-ride various registry policies. Names and net-blocks that are issued may not, in fact, be issued. Names are not a serious cost issue and they can, with some logistical difficulty, be re-issued. However, net-blocks cost over $1US/month (at the ISP level), or $2500/year from ARIN (the US registry), and they are not all that plentiful. The fundimental process disconnect here is that, IMHO, the various registries should be performing the MAPS function as part of their policy enforcement mechanism. This is not written into any of the registrar/registry agreements. If anything argues for a centralised systems approach, the MAPS functionality does. IMHO, this makes it an ICANN issue. Yes, this also politicizes it somewhat. No, some NANOG denizens won't like it and that is guaranteed. -- R O E L A N D M J M E Y E R Managing Director Morgan Hill Software Company t:01 925 373 3954 c:01 925 352 3615 f:01 925 373 9781
On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 08:38:35AM -0700, Roeland Meyer wrote:
It is with wry amusement that I have been following the MAPs debate, on NANOG, recently.
Indeed. Every time anything related to spam, or more specifically the MAPS blackholes, makes its way to NANOG, all the net.k00ks come out of the woodwork begging for sympathy, and remind us once again that they lack the mental capacity needed to Do The Right Thing and get themselves un-blackholed. Our mailboxes grow quickly despite the fact that nothing interesting, or of operational relevance, is discussed.
Then you make this comment, it couldn't dove-tail more beautifully. Those that do not know what MAPs is, please review http://www.mail-abuse.org/.
Those who continue to contribute to this nonsense, even though it's gotten to the point where it's clearly off-topic and best suited for spam-l, inet-access, or just about any list other than this one, please review <http://www.maps.org/>.
[...] MAPS has recently announced intention of charging for their service, in order to raise money for legal fees (they are under legal attack).
Quick, time for us to contribute to their legal defense fund. It's amazing just how how scary some of the individuals and organizations pestering them with threats of gratuitous litigation are.
The problem is that MAPS was distributing the lists and there were many local copies, within places like EarthLink and AOL. As long as those copies are maintained by MAPS, this is not a serious problem.
As has been pointed out earlier, MAPS subscribers are required to stay current. If they're not, perhaps it's time to enforce the terms of their membership agreement, though I'd imagine this too requires a good amount of time and money...
The result of an net-block being listed in MAPS is that entire chunks of the Internet cannot reach that net-block. This is done at the provider level.
Really? Are you aware of any large service providers _currently_ filtering transit customer egress/ingress using the MAPS RBL?
a net-block can be issued, to a new business, that may be perfectly useless and neither the ISP or the business knows about it until it is too late.
I'm sure many people do check newly allocated IP space before using it, to confirm it's not in a commonly used blackhole list, and nobody's filtering their route announcements (ie outdated and/or misconfigured bogon filters). And those who don't, should.
If anything argues for a centralised systems approach, the MAPS functionality does. IMHO, this makes it an ICANN issue. Yes, this also politicizes it somewhat.
I think you're taking this way too seriously. What next, ringing up the United Nations New World Order(tm) because some blackhole said boo to you? -adam
Our mailboxes grow quickly despite the fact that nothing interesting, or of operational relevance, is discussed.
Is there a MAPS-like service that lists the email addresses of *whiners* so that mail from them can be dropped by the MTA? Or would this be more of an RBL/ORBS type service? Not that *I* mind getting whining email. It's rather entertaining... since I don't have to *do* anything about it. :-) -tex -- ------------------ Jon Allen Boone tex@delamancha.org
participants (3)
-
Adam Rothschild
-
Jon 'tex' Boone
-
Roeland Meyer