[120577] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Article on spammers and their infrastructure
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Vegoda)
Thu Dec 24 19:17:45 2009
From: Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0912241155230.22812@soloth.lewis.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:17:15 -0800
To: Jon Lewis <jlewis@lewis.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 24, 2009, at 8:59 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
[=85]
>> I am sure that your interpretation was the original intent of the =
policy
>> text. However, the wording could also be read in a way that allows an =
LIR to
>> just provide registry services, without providing any connectivity =
services.
>=20
> That's one hell of a stretch. Registry services aren't needed if they=20=
> don't have the IP space, so saying that the service the end user is =
buying=20
> that justifies the IP assignment is 'registration services' is a =
circular=20
> argument.
Of course - but if you wanted to provide services to spammers and their =
friends it's the sort of stretch you'd find yourself making.
Regards,
Leo=
