[anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter, and some strange allocations

In message <16830.82.93.105.139.1285760484.squirrel at webmail.ripe.net>, 
"Laura Cobley" <laura at ripe.net> wrote:

>Dear Ronald,
>
>Thank you for your mail.
>
>To address your concerns, according to current address policy, the RIPE
>NCC is responsible for the distribution of Internet resources within the
>RIPE NCC Service Region. To comply with this requirement, the RIPE NCC
>does not deny the distribution of Internet resources to organisations
>outside the RIPE NCC Service Region, as long as those resources will be
>used within the RIPE NCC Service Region.

Ah!  OK, I understand.  So from your perspective it is prefectly legitimate
for (for example) the 195.80.148.0/22 block to show up in RIPE records as
being allocated to some mystery entity allegedly located in Belize (but
now apparently non-existant and out of business) so long as the traceroute
to that block indicates that it's actually being routed to Moldova, yes?

OK.  I understand.  Thanks for clarifying.

(Note:  This is _not_ a veiled criticism.  The policy is what it is.  I'm
just trying to understand it fully, especially since Laura was so kind as
to try to enlighten me about it.)

>Activities such as responding to complaints about spam are not covered by
>RIPE policy and are currently not in the scope of the RIPE NCC.

And you mentioned this why, exactly?

Did anybody say anything about spam?  I sure didn't.

>With regards to the hijacking of Internet number resources, I can assure
>you that we investigate all reports of hijacking of resources which are
>under the management of the RIPE NCC, as this is against RIPE policy. If
>the resources are found to be hijacked, the RIPE NCC will reclaim them.
>Any reports of suspected hijacking can be made to <ncc at ripe.net>.

I would not desire to make any such report at the present time.  To be clear,
I do NOT think that either the 195.80.148.0/22 block or AS50877 have been in
any meaningful or traditional sense ``hijacked''.

Ask me if those resources have been handed over, freely, voluntarily and
``legitimately'', by RIPE, to evil-doers (who used intentionally fradulent
information in their WHOIS records) however and my answer might be different.


Regards,
rfg