> On Mar 13, 2018, at 11:54 , Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> How do we address the risk that companies with fully automated 
> whois-population systems simply don't bother to do that research, and their 
> delegation ends up not getting added to whois at all?

I see that as less of a problem than the current situation. Eventually, this 
will result in complaints that reach
their whois contacts and/or their ARIN billing contacts.

If the billing contacts don’t respond, well, then their use of the IP addresses 
will become a short-term problem in most
cases.

> This may be an implementation detail, but I think we should make sure the 
> policy allows for an option for the new POC to replace the proposed new POC 
> object with a reference to one of their existing POC records…

Not sure how you expect that to work, but would be interested if you think you 
have a feasible proposal.

The devil is in the details.

You have Company A creating a POC for an individual that works at Company B and 
now you  want that individual from Company B to be able to ask ARIN to 
substitute the link on an IP block registered to Company A with an alternative 
POC provided by the individual from Company B. What could possibly go wrong?

Owen

> 
> -Scott
> 
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:07 AM, <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I support.
> 
> I think this will go a long way in getting correct POC's in the database at 
> the start.  Currently, whoever is doing the ordering might end up with their 
> contacts in the database, because that is the only information that the 
> service provider has. This is how we end up with purchasing or accounting 
> contacts in Whois who have no clue as to abuse complaints and/or the annual 
> validation email.  This will force the service provider to actually ASK who 
> the company wants as a Whois contact, and to explain to them what duties this 
> involves, including a reminder of the annual validation email that they need 
> to respond to.
> 
> Albert Erdmann
> Network Administrator
> Paradise On Line Inc.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2018, Christian Tacit wrote:
> 
> Dear Community Members,
> 
> The shepherds for the Draft Policy 2017-12: Require POC Validation Upon 
> Reassignment, are making two changes to its text.
> 
> First, the problem statement is being expanded a bit to explain how POCs for 
> reassigned blocks can be assigned without the knowledge of the individuals so 
> assigned under the present policy.
> 
> Second, proposed section 3.8 has been deleted. This is because it is 
> unintentionally misleading because a simple reassignment results in a 
> customer identifier versus an OrgID.  There is no contact information 
> contained in a simple reassignment other than street address that could be 
> used for notification, and thus it does not appear that the proposed NRPM 3.8 
> policy text is implementable.  Even if notification were possible, the "OR 
> postal address" in this section may also cause significant problems for some 
> companies as many companies have the same name associated with many different 
> locations and there are several locations that have many companies registered 
> there.
> 
> Based on these changes, the revised text reads:
> 
> 
> Version Date: March 12, 2018
> 
> 
> 
> Problem Statement:
> 
> Some large ISPs assign individuals to be POCs for reassigned blocks without 
> consultation of the individual they are inserting into Whois. For example, 
> during the reassignment/reallocation process, some large ISPs automatically 
> create POCs from their customer's order form. This process is automated for 
> many ISPs and therefore the resulting POCs are not validated prior to being 
> created in the ARIN Whois database. This creates unknowing POCs that have no 
> idea what Whois is or even who ARIN is at the time they receive the annual 
> POC validation email. It can also create multiple POCs per email address 
> causing that same person to receive a multitude of POC Validation emails each 
> year.
> 
> This policy proposal seeks to improve the situation where a POC is 
> unwittingly and unintentionally inserted into Whois.
> 
> It also seeks to mitigate the significant amount of time that ARIN staff 
> reports that they spend fielding phone calls from POCs who have no idea they 
> are in Whois.
> 
> Finally, it is hopeful that this proposal will improve the overall POC 
> validation situation, by forcing ISPs and customers to work together to 
> insert proper information into Whois at the time of sub-delegation.
> 
> 
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> Insert one new section into NRPM 3:
> 
> 3.7 New POC Validation Upon Reassignment
> 
> When an ISP submits a valid reallocation or detailed reassignment request to 
> ARIN which would result in a new POC object being created, ARIN must (before 
> otherwise approving the request) contact the new POC by email for validation. 
> ARIN's notification will, at a minimum, notify the POC of:
> 
> - the information about the organization submitting the record; and
> - the resource(s) to which the POC is being attached; and
> - the organization(s) to which the POC is being attached.
> 
> If the POC validates the request, the request shall be accepted by ARIN and 
> the new objects inserted into Whois.  If the POC does not validate the 
> request within 10 days, ARIN must reject the request.
> 
> 
> 
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> 
> Comments from the community are welcome!
> 
> 
> Christian S. Tacit
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml 
> <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> Please contact [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any 
> issues.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.

Reply via email to