[153944] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ZOMG: IPv6 a plot to stymie FBI !!!11!ONE!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Arturo Servin)
Mon Jun 18 07:51:45 2012
From: Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D47A8D25-60CC-49AF-B8E1-BD345CE6C090@delong.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 08:50:54 -0300
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 17 Jun 2012, at 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
>=20
> Lather rinse repeat with a better choice of address...
>=20
> 2001:550:3ee3:f329:102a3:2aff:fe23:1f69
>=20
> This is in the ARIN region...
>=20
> It's from within a particular ISP's /32.
>=20
> Has that ISP delegated some overlapping fraction to another ISP? If =
so, it's not in whois.
> Have they delegated it to an end user? Again, if so, it's not in =
whois.
>=20
> Same for 2001:550:10:20:62a3:3eff:fe19:2909
>=20
> I don't honestly know if either of those prefixes is allocated or not, =
so maybe nothing's wrong
> in this particular case, but if they have been delegated and not =
registered in whois, that's
> a real problem when it comes time to get a search warrant if speed is =
of the essence.
>=20
> Owen
>=20
Not being in the whois is not an indicator that the ISP (to whom =
the address block has been delegated) does not know about which customer =
has an IP (v4 or v6, doesn't matter). I have seen tons of ISPs that do =
not publish delegations in the whois but have a huge excel worksheets =
where they record every suballocation.
=09
You just need a warrant to see that info. Ergo, the FBI, =
interpol or you name it should not have problem to get them.
/as=
