[AusNOG] New /21 on Bogan / Delinquent Lists
shaun at dwyer.id.au
Mon Sep 21 13:29:57 EST 2009
Hi Bill, Shane,
While yes, that is true about legacy AUNIC ranges, there are other
contact records you can dig up.
For example, look at the AS that is advertising the range you're
interested in look at the whois data not just for that range and the
advertising AS, but also on the other ranges being advertised by that
AS. I'm sure that for most networks of interest, there will be
multiple IP ranges being advertised. Failing that, www.$AS-owner.tld/
Might be less automated, but its by no means impossible to get in touch.
Shane, billing data, as you're well aware (especially from previous
employment we've had together) is generally the most up to-date,
especially where any billing is done at frequent intervals.
What happened to the 'IP phone in each NOC' project so you could just
dial an AS and speak to the NOC easily? Is that still going?
On 20/09/2009, at 9:02 AM, Bill Walker wrote:
> Most of those legacy assignments, especially the small ones don't
> get charged anything. So there will be no billing.
> From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [ausnog-
> bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Shane Short [shane at short.id.au]
> Sent: Friday, 18 September 2009 10:26 p.m.
> To: Shaun Dwyer
> Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] New /21 on Bogan / Delinquent Lists
> On 18/09/2009, at 4:46 PM, Shaun Dwyer wrote:
>> On 18/09/2009, at 8:26 AM, Shane Short wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:29:37 +1000, "Darren Moss" <Darren.Moss at em3.com.au
>>>> I am surprised that in this day and age we don't have.....
>>>> A) APNIC checking block owner details and suspending where
>>>> information is
>>>> not correct (ie: automatic email checking or automatic phone
>>>> dialer with
>>>> response keys required)
>>> This may sound rather daft, but if the contact information for the
>>> particular IP block is incorrect, how does APNIC get in contact
>>> with the
>>> person to tell them their details are wrong? What about all the
>>> AUNIC blocks that were brought over that aren't associated with an
>>> I'm not even so sure how APNIC would go about 'suspending' the IP
>>> space, especially if they're unable to contact the owner. Maybe
>>> publish it in a blacklist of sorts? I wonder how long it'd take
>>> someone to
>>> realise this and get on the phone to their lawyer, because these
>>> people have stopped their internets working.
>> I agree with Darren on this one. Sanity checking contact data is
>> always a good thing.
>> As to how to get in touch, APNIC would get in touch using their
>> billing data. If there is anything you can rely on being up to
>> date, its a billing database.
>> Given that invoices are sent out once a year by APNIC for members
>> to renew, contact details should perhaps be updated at this point
>> in time too. Perhaps even just an automated email goes out
>> requiring a link be clicked to say 'yes, im alive and paying
>> attention' once every 6 months? No response in 2 weeks? escalate to
>> a billing contact, still no response?, flag as 'needs a phone
>> call'. Shouldn't need to hire any more people, just a bit of work
>> for the in-house development team.
> You've never tried to get in contact with someone with technical
> clue via the billing department before, have you? :)
> Sure, in an ideal world this'd work, but the problem is again the
> legacy AUNIC ranges in 203/8 which are so so old they almost
> definitely don't have the correct info. (if you recall shaun, a few
> of the old ranges at one of our previous employers were, and
> continue to be incorrect)
>> Don't get me wrong, APNIC do a great job... just like with
>> anything, there is always scope for improvement.
> Sure, APNIC do a great job and they continue to do so when with
> their de-bogoning project, but why should APNIC be held responsible
> for people who don't set their equipment up properly, or don't
> maintain it correctly?
> As a community, we're responsible for the current mess and as a
> community, I think we should make some kind of effort to try and
> resolve the problem, which comes back to my original suggestion of a
> 'known offenders' list of networks who don't keep their filtering up-
> to-date along with methods in which to contact them in the event
> they are incorrectly blocking you. This would've been a great help
> when I was trying to contact certain people, that's for sure. Also
> the publicness of it might encourage them to rethink their policies.
> No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG -
> www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.100/2374 -
> Release Date: 09/17/09 15:55:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AusNOG