[anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy

In message <12A549E2-2EF4-4CA3-BD9D-1541C8B8302A at icann.org>, 
Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda at icann.org> wrote:

>On Mar 8, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> Is there a document somewhere, either within RIPE or ICANN, that says
>> explicitly that ``satellite connectivity providers'' may do X, Y, and Z?
>
>You appear to be taking the approach that only what is explicitly permitted=
>is allowed.

I beg to differ.  I am merely taking the same approach that you are appear
to have taken, formalism as a defense for what rational people with at least
just a tad of the common sense that God gave them would see as being clearly
infensible.

But I don't blame you personally.  There appears to be an awfully widespread
lack of common sense on the Internet these days, and you are certainly far
from alone in falling back on comfortable formalisms as a means of rational-
izing and/or justifying massive unjustifiable waste of precious resources.

>> What EXACTLY do you mean by ``selling connectivity services''.  Please be
>> precise.  Then I might be able to provide an answer to your question.
>
>The dictionary definition, such as this one from the American Heritage dict=
>ionary, is fine.
>
>"The ability to make and maintain a connection between two or more points i=
>n a telecommunications system: a phone company that offers excellent Intern=
>et connectivity."

Reaching into the simplicity of the American Heritage dictionary is neither
helpful nor enlightening in the present highly technical context.

I own a broadband modem/router thingy.  Do I provide connectivity to myself?

Does the ocean provide connectivity between North America and Europe?
Certainly, without it we would have had no place to lay the cables.

Well, nevermind.  Since it appears that you may be a bit reluctant to further
clarify your own question to me in concrete technical terms, I think that
we can perhaps dispense with the need for that, for now anyway, and instead
of trying to wrestle with the terminology of the abstract, we can just deal
with the immediate and the concrete.

I posted lists of IP addresses and domain names within several ``RIPE'' IP
address blocks that I allege have been handed over for use by American
bulk e-mail advertising companies.  (If you no longer have that e-mail or
those lists I will be happy to re-send them to you.)

So to cut to the chase here, I would like to propose something simple.  Why
don't YOU select at random some IP addresses out of the middles of those
IP address blocks, and then do whatever you do... whatever you think is
technically appropriate to do... traceroutes or whatever, as necessary...
and then come back here and then YOU can teach ME, by example, what is
and what is not, in your estimation, ``selling connectivity services''.
I'll be happy to defer to your vastly greater experience in these matters...
as detailed in your online bio... as long as you take the time to explain
whatever conlusions you arrive at with respect to those specific IP blocks.

Yes, I've already done my own paltry and miniscule research with respect to
the ``connectivity'' of those blocks, and I've reached some of my own con-
clusions.  But I will be happy to withold those (naive?) opinions and defer
to your evidently greater expertise, so long as you will do me the courtesy
of explaining the technical basis for your own independent conclusions.

>As I read the current IPv4 policy, address space transfers that are not use=
>d for a connection to the provider have to be made according to the transfe=
>r policy in section 5.5:

OK.  Great.  So now, do any of the blocks that I previously posted about
meet that requirement?  Do any fail to meet it?  If so, which ones and how
did you determine that?

I look forward to being educated by your analysis.


Regards,
rfg