[anti-abuse-wg] Russian carding... no, Islandic carding... no Belizian carding!

In message <20160811133008.GN862 at cilantro.c4inet.net>, 
"Sascha Luck [ml]" <aawg at c4inet.net> wrote:

>PA resources, such as the /29 you're banging on about...

Most recently, I believe that I was "banging on about" a /26... not a /29.
Not that it really matters much either way.  I just want to make sure
we're talking about that same thing.

>...are *assigned* to the end user by a LIR from larger space *allocated*
>to the LIR by the RIR (RIPE NCC in this case)

I do (and did) see that the /26 that has irked me most recently is
indeed, as you say, just a smallish chunk within a much larger
allocated block, where the applicable WHOIS record says that the
larger containing block is registered to a different entity.

>Any fraud, if such it is, is perpetrated on the *LIR*, not on RIPE NCC.

Well, let me stop you right there and ask you to break this down for
me a bit, just so I'm clear.

I assume that we are in agreement that there does exist, at the present
moment, a WHOIS record within the RIPE database that purports to provide
registrant details for the 82.221.130.64/26 block, yes?

I admit that I am actually ignorant about most of the mechanical details
of how RIPE WHOIS records generally, and that specific WHOIS record in
particular, come to reside within the RIPE WHOIS data base.  So I think
that perhaps you can help me out here, and educate me.  I ask in all
seriousness.

How was the WHOIS record for the 82.221.130.64/26 block entered into
the RIPE WHOIS data base?  Who entered it?  Would that have been this
thing calling itself "OrangeWebsite.com - Network" (ORG-IL351-RIPE)
or would that have been "Advania hf." (ORG-Sh2-RIPE) acting in its
capacity as the registrant of the entire containing /16?

I think that this is an important point, technically, or I wouldn't
be asking.
  
>FWIW, if a LIR is consistently and wilfully creates fraudulent
>records in the ripedb you can make a complaint and the NCC has
>sanctions available up to and including closure of the offending LIR.

This really is going to be educational for me!  Seriously.

If you could further elaboarte on the two specific points you just
made, then that sure would be a help to me as I try to draft some
concrete proposal, as a couple of people have requested me to do.

To start with, you said that I can "make a complaint".  Looking only
at the formal RIPE NCC Articles of Association (ripe-602) I don't
see anywhere in there where it says anything about the NCC even
being obliged to accept, let alone do anything with whatever kind of
report you are referring to as a "complaint".  So did I just miss
that?  Or is there some other binding document that I should be looking
at which describes these "complaints", how they must be either submitted
to or received by NCC, or how they must, may, or will be acted upon?
If so, and if you can supply a link, I'd be greatful.  (This really is
all news to me.  I really didn't know that there was already a formalized
procedure in place for either submitting or processing what you apparently
prefer to call "complaints".  I would prefer the word "report", but just
as long as we both know what we are talking about, there shouldn't be
a problem.)

Likewise and similarly, if there is a document which goes into detail
regarding this range of sanctions you've talked about, I would dearly
love to obtain a link to that also.  (Sorry to be such a burden, but
there are hundreds of RIPE documents, and it sounds to me like you may
perhaps already know which one I should be looking at, and it would be
real helpful if you could share that with me.)

>It is important to understand the distinction between
>allocation and assignment and the process that leads to an
>assignment of resources to an end-user before making wild
>accusations. 

OK, if it is important to understand it, then please proceed to explain
it.  I am all ears.

(I should say also that I _do_ look forward to the day when I'll be fully
educated about all this stuff, after which, it seems, I will have then
earned the right, in your view to legitimately begin in ernest the task
of making wild accusations.  I can hardly wait. :-)


Regards,
rfg