[address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at unfix.org
Fri Jun 13 13:46:53 CEST 2008
michael.dillon at bt.com wrote (>): I previously wrote (>>): (It is really handy that when you make a comment about something somebody says that you actually name the person so that the person can reply, it solves me having to read way too much email)_ >> Even though this will give the NCC a bit more work to do, I >> do support this proposal. One of the main reasons being that >> the allocations will remain to be properly registered and are >> thus accountable. > > I disagree that this will make anyone more accountable. I didn't say "more", it will remain as it is now. If there was a free invisible trade and what is in whois would not match real life then it would become a real mess and none of the information would be clear. > As long as > addresses are in use on the Internet, tools such as traceroute make it > possible to identify the source of traffic, and the organization which > is actually using an IP address block. In fact, I am currently sorting > out an issue with SAIX in South Africa announcing, and passing traffic > for someone who is using one of our IP address ranges. The fact that our > address range is correctly registered in ARIN's database did not stop > someone from using it on the Internet, and the fact that the user is not > in any RIR database, does not prevent us from solving the problem. Analogy time: That you own a house on paper, doesn't mean that others can't use it by just breaking in and living there. You will have to enforce that differently. Route objects in the IRR's, S-BGP etc come to mind. Properly managing your network is the main thing there. Also traceroute doesn't help a thing already for 10 years due to nice tricks like Rotorouter http://seclists.org/bugtraq/1998/Aug/0091.html ;) > In fact, I suspect that most companies don't even care to make the > actual user of an IP address range accountable. If the next link in the > chain is accountable, i.e. the upstream of this non-accountable IP > address user, then the problem can be quickly resolved. True, which is why it is mostly good enough to have a responsive abuse contact for a block, and not an unresponsive end-user who doesn't even know what it is all about. (Fighting and avoiding abuse is my prime interest in proper records at the RIR's) > Therefore, accountability is not necessary in all cases. At the same > time, RIPE can only affect accountability very indirectly with correct > database entries. The history of the RIPE database and other RIR > databases shows that they don't have a big impact on accountability and > they also do not have a great track record for accuracy. I just do not > see a connection between greater (or lesser) accountability, and a more > accurate (or less accurate) RIPE database. In cases where you see a problem with the accuracy of the database, contact the NCC and they can look into it and in most cases quickly resolve it. That is what I do when I see something funny, which does happen so every now and then. As for saying that this proposal doesn't help, nonsense, it keeps the information correct, which helps a lot more than not having that information at all. Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20080613/cf91f594/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]