Re: [apops] rfc-ignorant.org

  • To: George Michaelson <ggm at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: Re: [apops] rfc-ignorant.org
  • From: Neale Banks <neale at lowendale dot com dot au>
  • Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 00:15:08 +1000 (EST)
  • Cc: Joe Abley <jabley at automagic dot org>, apops at lists dot apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: <16726.1003494811 at apnic dot net>
  • Sender: owner-apops@lists.apnic.net
    • On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, George Michaelson wrote:
      
      > In a twisted sense, since the parent record at ARIN has effectively got
      > spambot at arin dot net as the email address for coordinator, its possible they
      > argue we are at fault.
      > 
      > I have discussed this informally with ARIN staff, and with RIPE staff
      > at NANOG meetings. The value of the email address for the /8s is really
      > marginal. But, for somebody in a reductionist state of mind, we could be
      > judged to be non-compliant.
      
      That appears to be the, er, "thinking".  Their response to me enquiry as
      to the listing of 202/7 being serious:
      
      ----------------------------8<----------------------------
      It's very serious, since APNIC can't get their ARIN contact handle 
      configured properly....
      [whois -h whois.arin.net | head]
      ----------------------------8<----------------------------
      
      I honestly can't fathom the logic.  There's a whole whois server
      referenced (although the response "conveniently" didn't list that bit of
      the whois output.
      
      > What do people think? Arguably, we should wear the spam. Obviously I prefer
      > not. And yes, for the level of activity the whois trollers on the edge 
      > represent when attempting to complain about real abuse, I do regard them as
      > spammers. they share many traits:
      > 
      > 1) they randomly cc huge lists of addresses in their complant.
      > 
      > 2) they do not appear to even read the record, its robotic responses
      > 
      > 3) clue density appears low.
      > 
      > I wish I knew the answer. 
      
      FWIW, I think your current position is defensible.
      
      I'm astonished that any mail server operator would take these clowns
      seriously.
      
      Regards,
      Neale.
      
      *             APOPS: Asia Pacific Operations Forum              *
      * To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to apops-request at apnic dot net *