North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Class "B" IP BLOCK

  • From: ddragon
  • Date: Wed May 07 00:37:20 2003

[email protected] wrote:
>> Technology staff of Erie Forge and Steel is well aware, and approving,

>> of the current usage of their IP space. What you consider 
>> "hijacking", they consider innovation, and an opportunity to give
>> to the Internet community that's allowed them to prosper over
>> years. 
>If they are truly giving back to the community, they should refer
>to BCP4.

Who are you to tell them how to run their network, when you can't even
keep your own network's SPAM problem under control?  

BCP4 documents a practice which is neither "Best" nor "Common".  In fact,
 it's heavily flawed, and relies on the incorrect assumptions that there's
somehow a shortage of IPv4 space, and ARIN is worthy of free hand-outs
in the form of large blocks of IP space, with no monitary compensation
offered to those who "surrender" them.  Anyone who even considers following
it needs to have their head examined.

Erie Forge has done absolutely nothing wrong in this matter; their IP
space is no more "jacked" than any other.

>> "7. Postings to the list must be made using real, identifiable
>> and addresses, rather than aliases." 
>This _is_ my real address. 

Moot point.  You're not posting with your actual first and last name
in the From header.  In other words, you are in violation of the NANOG
AUP.  I respectfully ask that you do the honrable thing and come into
compliance, or unsubscribe yourself from nanog-post, lest MERIT will
take the appropriate action on your behalf.

This is no forum for anonymous cowards.

>The rest of your message is merely reaching. 

"Merely" reaching?  Given the subscriber volume on here, I believe it
was quite effective in its intended circulation goals.

>If you can convince someone that GweepCo (or RCN, since you harped on
>about them for a while) has/is/will done/doing/do something wrong or
>unethical, be my guest. However, I think you'll probably have a tough
>time doing so, since many of the GweepCo folks are respected members
>of the networking/systems community 

Obviously you're missing the gist of this and earlier threads on this
topic.  It's been proven that many network operators represented on NANOG,
 who on the surface appear perfectly legitimate, run spamming operations
or harbor known spammers behind closed doors.  For this reason, everyone,
 including this ficticious "Gweep corporation" of yours must be regarded
as black hat, until Kai Schlicting or the SPEWS maintainers are able
to demonstrate otherwise.   Vigilance is key here.  If you've got an
armed threat, you need an armed presence.

>AfterBurner and the rest of the RCN
>abuse team is widely respected as one of the best in the industry.

"AfterBurner", LOL!  If they're so respected, why are they incapable
of demonstrating a bit of common sense and netiquite as posting with
their real names instead of pseudonyms?  How am I to take anyone seriously
when they go by "AfterBurner"?  This is the operational community you're
addressing here, not the audience at a 2600 meeting.

And you've failed to even comment on the URL I produced earlier, showing
evidence of SPAM on RCN's network, some originating from RCN sales and
support people.  

Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get
FREE encrypted email:

Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger

Big $$$ to be made with the HushMail Affiliate Program: