[ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael Markstaller
mm at elabnet.de
Wed Oct 17 23:20:53 CEST 2012
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 17.10.2012 23:16, Sascha Luck wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:53:02PM +0200, Michael Markstaller > wrote: >> For a working Internet I'd appreciate a definite, clear, >> confirmed, current contact for resources in case of abuse etc.. > > For the n-th time now in this thread: The LIR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE > for abuse from a sponsored PI range. Same as the NCC IS NOT > RESPONSIBLE for abuse from a PA range. > > As long as people will attempt to MAKE the LIRs responsible for > their sponsored PI, I will oppose any such policy. Harassing a LIR > for perceived abuse from a PI range wastes your time and pisses off > the LIR. Who is it then? Sorry, thats a little unfair.. We as LIR and me as CTO have to be responsible for our resources. Lets say it a little drastic: If someone asks me for a /24 to spam the world, I'd tell him I won't do this as I'm responsible what happens there. Point. But would it be ok to tell: "Well, hmm, get a PI don't tell anybody it's from me and push out your shit over another provider so they just don't call up me?" Don't think so.. > That, the sponsoring LIR *IS* responsible for since 2007-01, so > any non-contactable PI holders should be shut down when the next > payday comes around at the latest. Also the NCC can shutdown LIRs > for incorrect information, I assume that to include PI > information. I don't see this to happen but I maybe wrong.. >> That's the point where I want to know, whom to contact "upstream" >> to clarify this.. Someone should be able to get contacted (not >> responsible!).. > > A sponsoring LIR *may* be the upstream, in which case the ASPATH > should show it. Many LIRs do not route their sponsored PI > resources. Thats clear but there IMHO must be some path to get hold of the user - either via sponsoring LIR or via upstream (which might be more complicated but also a way..) >> Just a suggestion: If its only about privacy, a tradeoff could >> be: only visible for LIRs in lirportal (?) > > That may be acceptable, at least more so than making it > uncontrolledly public. I could live with that, as long as abuse-mails don't end up in a fictious, never existing mailbox ;) Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlB/ITQACgkQaWRHV2kMuAJeIQCfdm0mXW8XFEGbGR5+gofBkXkq gNUAnROcA9zHsew0BTb9Tz5DgEL+PKBc =8AhU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]