[cooperation-wg] publication of data about legacy resources
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] publication of data about legacy resources
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] publication of data about legacy resources
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Roland Perry
roland at internetpolicyagency.com
Tue Sep 23 10:10:25 CEST 2014
In message <35B3918F-26C3-4450-9196-B93EFADF9E17 at rfc1035.com>, at 13:28:24 on Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> writes >On 22 Sep 2014, at 13:06, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote: > >>> Well, we both know that for this specific case Roland the holding >>>entity does still exist. It just has a different name. >> >> Not really. The entity has been "reorganised", the address allocation >>used elsewhere within government via various departments concerned >>with "delivery" of government services. It's actually quite messy. > >True. But that's internal detail for the address holder which is nobody >else's business. Sounds to me more like a transfer to me; the original address-holder was one specified department, not the whole of HM Government. Perhaps it would have saved a lot of grief if the original allocation had been to the latter in the first place. >>> We understand that FUBAR is the current address holder and contact >>>for FOO/8. >> >> This is the crux - how does IANA come to the understanding? > >It could poll the holders of these /8s once a year. Or ask them to keep >the info about those allocations up to date. No big deal. There are >only a handful of /8s which could be problematical. And since IPv4 is >just about used up, it's hard to see why anyone should be worrying >about those legacy /8s. As I said before, if someone thinks this really >matters, they are welcome to feed their concerns into the IANA >oversight discussions. Perhaps they will. >> But it does matter if (one or more of): The building whose address is >>mentioned has closed, the phone numbers and emails don't work any >>more, the named person has retired, the addresses appear to be used by >>completely different bits of the government as well. > >Yeah. But this is no different from a teeny subset of the problem space >for whois in the context of domain names. All of the above concerns >(and more) exist for domain names. The world just has to cope with >that, even if the answers are not to everyone's liking. In the case of /8's it's more like an entire ccTLD going off the grid. >Frankly, I think it's a waste of time focusing on whois at all. The entries in IANA's /8 table aren't really a whois, they are a hint at what one of the lines in the whois might be. -- Roland Perry
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] publication of data about legacy resources
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] publication of data about legacy resources
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]