[anti-abuse-wg] Use of RIPE region space by out-of-region users, was RIPE policy

In message <0DF22081-3CA4-4E6A-BC95-118CC8BCDE68 at blacknight.ie>, 
"Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele at blacknight.ie> wrote:

>
>On 9 Mar 2011, at 12:43, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> Secondly, regarding the local blacklisting of blacknight.ie, I can assure
>> you that it's nothing personal.  That happens to all domains that spam me=
>.
>> If you want to see the spam that triggered that, ask and I'll be happy to
>> dig it out for you.  (There's a handy contact form on my web site for use
>> by folks in domains that are in the local blacklist.)
>
>
>Well if the form on your site loaded I would have

Works for me.

>If you could send it to me offlist or to abuse at blacknight.ie we will look
>into it

Sent, as requested.

Was there some particular reasons why Nigerian fraudsters would have been
allowed to send e-mail through your servers in Jan of '010?  Did you have
a security melt down?

>> If either of you would like to return to _this_ reality for a moment, you
>> may perhaps notice that (contrary to your bunker-mentality perception) I
>> actually _didn't_ attack your right to sell service to Mongolia, if that
>> is your wish.
>
>Ok, but you didn't communicate that particularly clearly

Why do you say that?  Because I pointed out that in addition to eveything
else that made the IP blocks I posted aout fishy, they also just happened
to have been given over to _American_ mass e-mailers?

OK.  Gee.  Sorry.  Please strike the word "American".

>> I did (and do) however wonder out loud about RIPE policies when I see
>> what appears to be large scale waste and fraud relating to precious and
>> increasingly scarce number resources, and I did (and do) wonder about
>> cases where some ``provider'' in the RIPE region somehow manages to get
>> hold of a nice sized chunk of IPv4 space which is then, apparently, sold
>> off to an American mass e-mailing company with _no_ apparent connectivity
>> being associated with that deal... a practice that even the ICANN Politic=
>al
>> Scientist fellow with the exceptionally thin skin seemed to indicate was
>> in fact a violation of *existing* RIPE policies.
>
>See here you're not making any sense
>
>I know you think you are, but you're actually ignoring reality
>
>We have clients from the US (and elsewhere) that do not have a physical pre
>sence in Ireland or anywhere else in Europe.
>
>If they are given an allocation of space it's obviously going to be assigne
>d to them.

Do you have ``customers'' to whom you simply sell IP addresses, and nothing
else?

>For all you know they could be using the space and servers etc., just to se
>rve their EMEA clients ..

I have no idea what that stands for... Emerging Market E-mail Association?

>Now obviously if they're abusing the space and the policies then I'd love t
>o see that addressed..

If??

> but I don't see why where a company is based is relevant

Hey!  I don't make the rules.  I'm just trying to understand what they are

Maybe location _isn't_ actually relevant to anything, ever.  But it has
been my understanding that if a company from your side of the pond came
over and asked ARIN for a hunk of IPv4 space without so much as putting
a single server or router anywhere in North America, then you'd be politely
told to go fish.  (And likewise and conversely for someone on this side
of the pond, coming and asking RIPE for space.)

Did I misunderstand?

If not, then maybe location _does_ matter after all.  No?


Regards,
rfg