Seems to me that the problem in this case is not ARIN, it is the way your particular service provider works.
Choices include: 1. Work with your service provider to change their process. 2. Change service providers. What am I missing? Owen > On Apr 13, 2015, at 1:36 PM, David Huberman <david.huber...@microsoft.com> > wrote: > > Hi Owen, > > I can give you a great example that's timely. My company ordered some > circuits from ISP X recently. ISP X has a policy that they only do REASSIGN > DETAIL. They registered the reassignments with POC data that points to a > network engineer who ordered the circuit. It's the way their system works. > > The engineer emailed me very angry that her information was in ARIN Whois - > and in fact, in Whois many times with multiple iterations of her POC -- POC1, > POC2, POC3, POC4, POC5, etc all with the same information pointing to her. > It even included her direct phone number, which happened to be her mobile > phone, and she was upset about that. > > Luckily for her, she knew who ARIN was, she knew who the hostmaster was in > our company (me!), and I knew how to get it fixed. > > BTW, in order to get it fixed, I chose to do what I thought was the right > thing: I asked ARIN to "consolidate" the reassignment records into my main > OrgID. ARIN *would not do it* without the explicit written permission of > ISP X. (Luckily for us, ISP X consented.) > > Hope that helps, > David > > David R Huberman > Principal, Global IP Addressing > Microsoft Corporation > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong.com] >> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 1:30 PM >> To: David Huberman >> Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net >> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy idea: POC Validation >> >> David, >> >> I don’t see the angry phone call as the problem. I see it as a symptom. >> >> The problem is the incorrect registrations. I want us to find out about those >> incorrect registrations and resolve them. I certainly don’t want to simply >> remove the symptom (angry phone call) by masking the problem (incorrect >> registration). >> >> Owen >> >>> On Apr 13, 2015, at 1:23 PM, David Huberman >> <david.huber...@microsoft.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Ted, >>> >>> Thanks for the reply. >>> >>> By "indirect resource registration records", I meant reassignment records. >> ISP has a /17. They reassign a /28 to a customer, and decide to put customer >> POC information on it. That POC only exists because of the /28 - it isn't a >> POC >> for any directly registered allocation, assignment, or AS number. These are >> the POCs who are complaining en masse to ARIN after receiving POC >> Validation communications. My reasoning for removing POC validation for >> these types of POCs is that ISPs have the option to not register POCs at all >> -- >> they can choose "REASSIGN SIMPLE" as a path for registering SWIP >> information, and that doesn't have any POC info. Secondly, I'm not convinced >> there's a significant value in up-to-date POC information for reassigned >> numbers. In the end, the ISP (the direct registrant) is the party >> responsible >> for the IP addresses and use. (And in 90%+ of cases, the ISP is responsible >> for routing in the DFZ, too. For the cases where a reassigned block is >> announced by th >>> e customer, there's a customer ASN easily found in the routing tables, >>> and that contact information is more germane than a SWIP record.) >>> >>> I hope that's clearer. >>> >>> David >>> >>> David R Huberman >>> Principal, Global IP Addressing >>> Microsoft Corporation >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] >>>> On Behalf Of Ted Mittelstaedt >>>> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:12 PM >>>> To: arin-ppml@arin.net >>>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy idea: POC Validation >>>> >>>> >>>> As one of the initiators of this policy I must state that none of us >>>> who worked on this ever assumed the POC Validation Policy would be >>>> the END of the process. >>>> >>>> The idea was that when a POC was marked invalid, that ARIN would >>>> institute an investigation into the number resources held by the >>>> invalid POC and if they did locate the actual holder, they would give >>>> that holder 30 days to supply valid POC contact info for whois that >>>> would replace the bogus invalid contact info. >>>> >>>> If the holder wasn't forthcoming, ARIN will delete the POC. >>>> Resources that have no POC's justifying their existence are then freed up >> for reassignment. >>>> >>>> If ARIN is not doing this, then it is completely understandable that >>>> you would be getting large numbers of phone calls from people annoyed >>>> that their email addresses are still in whois. >>>> >>>> So, ARIN can start doing this and thereby make the people happy who >>>> are complaining, and at the same time, freeing up resources that are >>>> held by stale or bogus POC data. >>>> >>>> You said "indirect resource registration records" >>>> >>>> What exactly is that? >>>> >>>> In my opinion, ANY POC that is in whois that is associated in any way >>>> with an organization or individual who has IP addresses, and is being >>>> used as justification for holding resources, must remain in the validation >> list. >>>> >>>> It seems quite obvious and apparent that POCs that ARIN has judged to >>>> be invalid, and is in the process of investigating, would be calling >>>> and complaining. In general people who are doing things they >>>> shouldn't be doing, don't like to be investigated would certainly would >> complain. >>>> That can be solved easily by deleting their records and thereby >>>> freeing up resources. Then you don't contact them again and the >>>> community gets back the IP addressing they have held. >>>> >>>> Does not a POC that is being contacted by ARIN have the right to have >>>> their information deleted? If they are calling in and complaining >>>> that their records are in there, they obviously want them removed. >>>> So, ARIN can remove them and stop bothering them. >>>> >>>> You need to define the difference between "indirect resource >>>> registration records" and "associated with an active directly registered >> number resource" >>>> before anyone can really make a judgement on this policy proposal >> change. >>>> >>>> It just seems very simple to me. If they are a POC they are there >>>> because their existence is justifying some IP address holding in some >>>> way, there is some connection. If their POC is no longer justifying >>>> an IP address holding and there is no connection whatsoever to an IP >>>> address holding, then take their POC out and doing so will automatically >> quit contacting them. >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>>> On 4/13/2015 11:11 AM, David Huberman wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Richard Jimmerson's Policy Experience Report indicated that 50% of >>>>> the >>>> phone calls that RSD receives are about POC validation, and that they >>>> receive many angry emails and calls from POCs who are only associated >>>> with indirect resource registration records. In response, I offer the >>>> following change to the NRPM : >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Existing text: >>>>> >>>>> 3.6 Annual Whois POC Validation >>>>> 3.6.1 Method of Annual Verification >>>>> During ARIN's annual Whois POC validation, an email will be sent to >>>>> every >>>> POC in the Whois database. Each POC will have a maximum of 60 days to >>>> respond with an affirmative that their Whois contact information is >>>> correct and complete. Unresponsive POC email addresses shall be >>>> marked as such in the database. If ARIN staff deems a POC to be >>>> completely and permanently abandoned or otherwise illegitimate, the >> POC record shall be marked invalid. >>>> ARIN will maintain, and make readily available to the community, a >>>> current list of number resources with no valid POC; this data will be >>>> subject to the current bulk Whois policy. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I propose we make the first sentence read: >>>>> >>>>> "During ARIN's annual Whois POC validation, an email will be sent to >>>>> every >>>> POC in the Whois database that is associated with an active directly >>>> registered number resource." >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> David R Huberman >>>>> Principal, Global IP Addressing >>>>> Microsoft Corporation >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PPML >>>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>> ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >>>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PPML >>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >>>> Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >>> Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. > _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.