v4 netblocks are not candy to be handed around for the asking, are they? Not sure. 2/8 and 46/8 are relatively new too .. http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/listings.lasso?isp=ripe SBL103318 46.42.192.0/20 RIPE 11-Feb-2011 01:46 GMT SC Netclass Srl (dirty block) (AS48838) SBL102988 2.56.0.0/14 RIPE 06-Feb-2011 02:46 GMT Michael Lindsay / iMedia Networks AS44559 spammer blocks SBL102994 94.154.64.0/18 RIPE 06-Feb-2011 09:44 GMT Michael Lindsay / iMedia Networks E-Rent LLC - dirty block -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
Suresh, On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 09:24 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
v4 netblocks are not candy to be handed around for the asking, are they? Not sure.
I don't understand what you are trying to say. Can you please say what you mean in simple English? Perhaps you are implying that the RIPE community or the RIPE NCC should do something to revoke address space from networks used for certain activities? If that's what you mean, please just say it, then we can discuss the basic idea as well as details.
2/8 and 46/8 are relatively new too ..
Looking at the /14 that you referenced:
SBL102988 2.56.0.0/14 RIPE 06-Feb-2011 02:46 GMT Michael Lindsay / iMedia Networks AS44559 spammer blocks
Looking at the latest record in the database it seems like the block is about to be pulled for non-payment: remarks: The RIPE NCC will reclaim this allocation remarks: Please email billing@ripe.net changed: hostmaster@ripe.net 20100927 changed: hostmaster@ripe.net 20110118 Perhaps you think this should happen faster. In which case, please go ahead and propose such a change. Thanks! -- Shane
The whois already says they are reclaiming the /14 - but I think it'd have been better to improve their vetting procedures to ensure that such allocations never did take place. They do scrutinize paperwork for IP justification, hardware etc so it would be interesting to see what justification needs to be done to get a /14, and what is done to verify the accuracy of said paperwork. On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Perhaps you are implying that the RIPE community or the RIPE NCC should do something to revoke address space from networks used for certain activities?
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
Hi,
The whois already says they are reclaiming the /14 - but I think it'd have been better to improve their vetting procedures to ensure that such allocations never did take place.
They do scrutinize paperwork for IP justification, hardware etc so it would be interesting to see what justification needs to be done to get a /14, and what is done to verify the accuracy of said paperwork.
To quote from Andrea Cima, who said the following at the last RIPE meeting (taken from stenography report at http://ripe61.ripe.net/archives/steno/13/): "Now, with regards to transparency, what our intention is, is to publish all the RIPE NCC Registration Services procedures on?line, and in this way, it will be very clear to everyone that is requesting some resources, what is expected from them, what kind of information, we will ask or we may ask and what kind of documentation we will need. We will do this per type of ? request, per type of service and, of course, we will start with IPv4 address space resources because of the run?out situation. So this will be up on?line pretty soon from now. " So the procedure documentation you ask for should be available soon. Andrea: can you provide further information here? Thanks, Sander
Wonderful. And will this be updated to deal with specific aspects of v6 allocation? thanks suresh On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
To quote from Andrea Cima, who said the following at the last RIPE meeting (taken from stenography report at http://ripe61.ripe.net/archives/steno/13/):
"Now, with regards to transparency, what our intention is, is to publish all the RIPE NCC Registration Services procedures on?line, and in this way, it will be very clear to everyone that is requesting some resources, what is expected from them, what kind of information, we will ask or we may ask and what kind of documentation we will need. We will do this per type of ? request, per type of service and, of course, we will start with IPv4 address space resources because of the run?out situation. So this will be up on?line pretty soon from now. "
So the procedure documentation you ask for should be available soon.
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
Hi,
Wonderful. And will this be updated to deal with specific aspects of v6 allocation?
Andrea said it would be done per type of request, so I assume: yes Sander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Sander, Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi,
The whois already says they are reclaiming the /14 - but I think it'd have been better to improve their vetting procedures to ensure that such allocations never did take place.
They do scrutinize paperwork for IP justification, hardware etc so it would be interesting to see what justification needs to be done to get a /14, and what is done to verify the accuracy of said paperwork.
To quote from Andrea Cima, who said the following at the last RIPE meeting (taken from stenography report at http://ripe61.ripe.net/archives/steno/13/):
"Now, with regards to transparency, what our intention is, is to publish all the RIPE NCC Registration Services procedures on?line, and in this way, it will be very clear to everyone that is requesting some resources, what is expected from them, what kind of information, we will ask or we may ask and what kind of documentation we will need. We will do this per type of ? request, per type of service and, of course, we will start with IPv4 address space resources because of the run?out situation. So this will be up on?line pretty soon from now. "
So the procedure documentation you ask for should be available soon.
Andrea: can you provide further information here?
We are currently working on the IPv4 allocation and assignment procedure and expect it to be finalised and published in March. If the IPv4 allocation and assignment procedure is considered useful by the RIPE NCC membership, we will then publish procedure documents for IPv6 and AS Numbers. Best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC
Thanks, Sander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.11 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAk1VMswACgkQXOgsmPkFrjPCHACg01H/3RVkKcH+eZC+JslS6C5N 1i4AoJMm93myDaZ40F1/+diMQawueQ5j =xzVc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Excellent, Thank you. On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Andrea Cima <andrea@ripe.net> wrote:
We are currently working on the IPv4 allocation and assignment procedure and expect it to be finalised and published in March.
If the IPv4 allocation and assignment procedure is considered useful by the RIPE NCC membership, we will then publish procedure documents for IPv6 and AS Numbers.
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
participants (4)
-
Andrea Cima -
Sander Steffann -
Shane Kerr -
Suresh Ramasubramanian