william(at)elan.net wrote:
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Andrew - Supernews wrote:
"william" == william(at)elan net <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
william> The above line is as clear as it gets (if the other two
william> mentions that data is to be made available to public is not
william> enough), so there this argument that rwhois should be made
william> available only to ARIN is now against ARIN's policies and
william> whoever you know who is still making it should be pointed to
william> URL I listed.
NetRange: 4.0.0.0 - 4.255.255.255
ReferralServer: rwhois://rwhois.level3.net:4321
% telnet rwhois.level3.net 4321
Trying 209.244.1.179...
telnet: connect to address 209.244.1.179: Operation timed out
Doesn't seem to have made much difference yet...
Its kind of hard for ARIN to enforce its policies on L3 when they have
a /8 already and are not likely to ask for additional allocation...
But obviously L3 is not giving a very good example for others, so we
can all now say - don't be like L3 :)
Does ARIN have a policy that allows deallocation based on not conforming
to the requirements of allocations...?
(Might sound ridiculous, but if it works.....)
Regards,
Mat
