[90822] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matt Buford)
Thu Jun 15 14:35:34 2006
From: "Matt Buford" <matt@overloaded.net>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>, "chuck goolsbee" <chucklist@forest.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:35:02 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
"chuck goolsbee" <chucklist@forest.net> wrote:
> Anyway, if somebody could enlighten me to definitive proof, or stated
> policy by Goo... er "search engines", that confirms this "search engine
> result optimization by blatant abuse of IP addresses" I'd appreciate it. I
> for one believe it is bunk dreamt up by somebody trying to sell something.
> If it is true though, I would have to say that it "is evil" and I would
> imagine many folks here (and not to mention ARIN, RIPE, et al) would
> agree.
Is it true? I don't know, but a quick google search returns everyone
talking about it as if it is true.
If it is true, is it sort of gaming the system? Yes, I suppose so.
Instead of pulling 1 block of 30 from your IP allocation tool, you have to
pull 30 blocks of 1. This is more administrative work and I can completely
understand why someone might refuse to do it just because it is a silly
hassle.
But how could this possibly be IP abuse or evil (except perhaps in the eyes
of the search engines)? What difference does it make to ARIN if I give a
customer 30 IPs from a single /24 or 30 IPs from 30 different /24s? It
makes little difference to me and is trivial to do in my topology since I
already have 30+ /24s on the interface. So, I do so simply because I can't
think of any reason not to. It is slightly more work to document the IPs
since they each have to be put into my database instead of a single range,
but this is handled by the server people.
