On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Tony Hain wrote:
> I agree that ARIN should not be involved in enforcement, but
> one thing that ARIN (and the other RIR's) could do is make it
> easier for mail server operators to get *ALL* the blocks
> assigned to a given organization in one query. I find that
>
>From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On Behalf
>Of William Herrin
>Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 6:19 AM
>To: Michael Peddemors
>Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net
>Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN IPs and Spammers? => Need for Governance
>
>On Mo
On 14-11-10 11:27 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Unfortunately, most of this discussion is purely academic for ARIN as
most spamming originates either overseas (where ARIN is not the
responsible RIR) or it originates from hijacked machines on legitimate
networks in North America which will shut them
vin
-Original Message-
From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On
Behalf Of Michael Peddemors
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 9:56 AM
To: arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN IPs and Spammers? => Need for Governance
On 14-11-10 07:34 AM, Kevin K
On 11/10/2014 7:56 AM, Michael Peddemors wrote:
On 14-11-10 07:34 AM, Kevin Kargel wrote:
I have to agree with Ted. ARIN is not in the 'acceptable use
enforcement' business and that is a line that should not be crossed.
There are many other agencies and venues more appropriate for the task
of
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
> However, ARIN does have the mandate regarding proper SWIP for
> delegated IP Addresses, and enforcement in that area might be the first
step.
Suggest a useful penalty (within ARIN's organizational scope) for the
discovery of forged SWIP
--Original Message-
> From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Michael Peddemors
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 9:56 AM
> To: arin-ppml@arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN IPs and Spammers? => Need for Governance
>
> On 14
On 14-11-10 07:34 AM, Kevin Kargel wrote:
I have to agree with Ted. ARIN is not in the 'acceptable use enforcement'
business and that is a line that should not be crossed. There are many other
agencies and venues more appropriate for the task of spam regulation. ARIN is
not a first amendment
t; Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2014 6:57 PM
> To: arin-ppml@arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN IPs and Spammers? => Need for Governance
>
> I for one would never support such a proposal.
>
> I will point out the United States invented the Internet. This is somethin
I for one would never support such a proposal.
I will point out the United States invented the Internet. This is
something that EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has to accept. They
may not like to admit it even to themselves but they know it's true.
The United States modeled the Internet bas
atthew Kaufman; arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN IPs and Spammers? => Need for Governance
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 9:23 AM, John Von Stein
mailto:j...@qxccommunications.com>> wrote:
This does not need to be “eye for an eye” enforcement.
Just like a speeding, beyond th
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 9:23 AM, John Von Stein
wrote:
> This does not need to be “eye for an eye” enforcement.
>
>
>
> Just like a speeding, beyond the safety issues involved the deterrent
> against doing it partially the cost of the fine and the increased insurance
> premium but mostly is the f
This does not need to be “eye for an eye” enforcement.
Just like a speeding, beyond the safety issues involved the deterrent against
doing it partially the cost of the fine and the increased insurance premium but
mostly is the fear of losing the privilege, not the right, to drive. Repeated
or
13 matches
Mail list logo
