Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter, and some strange allocations
Dear Ronald, Thank you for your mail. To address your concerns, according to current address policy, the RIPE NCC is responsible for the distribution of Internet resources within the RIPE NCC Service Region. To comply with this requirement, the RIPE NCC does not deny the distribution of Internet resources to organisations outside the RIPE NCC Service Region, as long as those resources will be used within the RIPE NCC Service Region. Activities such as responding to complaints about spam are not covered by RIPE policy and are currently not in the scope of the RIPE NCC. With regards to the hijacking of Internet number resources, I can assure you that we investigate all reports of hijacking of resources which are under the management of the RIPE NCC, as this is against RIPE policy. If the resources are found to be hijacked, the RIPE NCC will reclaim them. Any reports of suspected hijacking can be made to <ncc@ripe.net>. Best Regards, Laura Cobley RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager
Dear Laura, With regards to the hijacking of Internet number resources, I can assure you that we investigate all reports of hijacking of resources which are under the management of the RIPE NCC, as this is against RIPE policy. If the resources are found to be hijacked, the RIPE NCC will reclaim them. It means RIPE NCC takes action to weekly CIDR-Report indicating "Possible Bogus Routes" announcement fall under the RIPE NCC domain? or RIPE NCC waits till anyone report such thing to ncc@ripe.net? Can you please explain. Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Laura Cobley <laura@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear Ronald,
Thank you for your mail.
To address your concerns, according to current address policy, the RIPE NCC is responsible for the distribution of Internet resources within the RIPE NCC Service Region. To comply with this requirement, the RIPE NCC does not deny the distribution of Internet resources to organisations outside the RIPE NCC Service Region, as long as those resources will be used within the RIPE NCC Service Region.
Activities such as responding to complaints about spam are not covered by RIPE policy and are currently not in the scope of the RIPE NCC.
With regards to the hijacking of Internet number resources, I can assure you that we investigate all reports of hijacking of resources which are under the management of the RIPE NCC, as this is against RIPE policy. If the resources are found to be hijacked, the RIPE NCC will reclaim them. Any reports of suspected hijacking can be made to <ncc@ripe.net>.
Best Regards,
Laura Cobley RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager
On 29 Sep 2010, at 13:41, Laura Cobley wrote:
Dear Ronald,
Thank you for your mail.
To address your concerns, according to current address policy, the RIPE NCC is responsible for the distribution of Internet resources within the RIPE NCC Service Region. To comply with this requirement, the RIPE NCC does not deny the distribution of Internet resources to organisations outside the RIPE NCC Service Region, as long as those resources will be used within the RIPE NCC Service Region.
Which makes perfect sense to me
Activities such as responding to complaints about spam are not covered by RIPE policy and are currently not in the scope of the RIPE NCC.
This I'm not so sure about. While I can understand that it is not currently part of RIPE's remit to do anything, does that mean that it will completely ignore abuse which is being "aided" by RIPE via the allocation of IP space?
With regards to the hijacking of Internet number resources, I can assure you that we investigate all reports of hijacking of resources which are under the management of the RIPE NCC, as this is against RIPE policy. If the resources are found to be hijacked, the RIPE NCC will reclaim them. Any reports of suspected hijacking can be made to <ncc@ripe.net>.
Best Regards,
Laura Cobley RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager
Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.mobi/ http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
On 29 Sep 2010, at 8:09, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote: [...]
Activities such as responding to complaints about spam are not covered by RIPE policy and are currently not in the scope of the RIPE NCC.
This I'm not so sure about. While I can understand that it is not currently part of RIPE's remit to do anything, does that mean that it will completely ignore abuse which is being "aided" by RIPE via the allocation of IP space?
I read Laura's words as meaning that the RIPE NCC has not yet been given clear direction (how) to act in this area. Not only is there not clear policy text for acting on abuse issues, the RIPE NCC Activity Plan 2010 (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-485.html) does not mention a role in coordinating or collaborating with anti-abuse organisations. I'm sure that Laura will correct me if I misunderstood her. Presumably, if the RIPE NCC Activity Plan 2011 mentioned it and there was a policy identifying the specific actions for the RIPE NCC, it would implement as appropriate. Regards, Leo Vegoda
In message <16830.82.93.105.139.1285760484.squirrel@webmail.ripe.net>, "Laura Cobley" <laura@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear Ronald,
Thank you for your mail.
To address your concerns, according to current address policy, the RIPE NCC is responsible for the distribution of Internet resources within the RIPE NCC Service Region. To comply with this requirement, the RIPE NCC does not deny the distribution of Internet resources to organisations outside the RIPE NCC Service Region, as long as those resources will be used within the RIPE NCC Service Region.
Ah! OK, I understand. So from your perspective it is prefectly legitimate for (for example) the 195.80.148.0/22 block to show up in RIPE records as being allocated to some mystery entity allegedly located in Belize (but now apparently non-existant and out of business) so long as the traceroute to that block indicates that it's actually being routed to Moldova, yes? OK. I understand. Thanks for clarifying. (Note: This is _not_ a veiled criticism. The policy is what it is. I'm just trying to understand it fully, especially since Laura was so kind as to try to enlighten me about it.)
Activities such as responding to complaints about spam are not covered by RIPE policy and are currently not in the scope of the RIPE NCC.
And you mentioned this why, exactly? Did anybody say anything about spam? I sure didn't.
With regards to the hijacking of Internet number resources, I can assure you that we investigate all reports of hijacking of resources which are under the management of the RIPE NCC, as this is against RIPE policy. If the resources are found to be hijacked, the RIPE NCC will reclaim them. Any reports of suspected hijacking can be made to <ncc@ripe.net>.
I would not desire to make any such report at the present time. To be clear, I do NOT think that either the 195.80.148.0/22 block or AS50877 have been in any meaningful or traditional sense ``hijacked''. Ask me if those resources have been handed over, freely, voluntarily and ``legitimately'', by RIPE, to evil-doers (who used intentionally fradulent information in their WHOIS records) however and my answer might be different. Regards, rfg
participants (5)
-
Aftab Siddiqui -
Laura Cobley -
Leo Vegoda -
Michele Neylon :: Blacknight -
Ronald F. Guilmette