Re: Perspective on ARIN allocations to non-American entities

[David Schwartz <davids () webmaster com>]

On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 22:56:46 -0500 (EST), Brian Wallingford wrote:

> I've searched the IANA and ICANN sites, and have found no justification
> for what appear to be ARIN allocations to foreign entities within
> 66.231.
>
> Two serious UCE/hacking attempt offenders are as follows:
> 66.231.64.0/20   GIGA-BLK-1

        Last I checked, Columbia was part of South America. The 'A' in Arin means
America, the two continents.

> 66.231.128.0/20  ECON-BLK-1
>
> Both of which appear to be completely unapologetic for their users'
> activities and refuse to take any action against repeat offenders
> (10's of thousands of attempts per week here).  Why have these blocks
> apparently been allocated via ARIN?
>
> Am I missing something?

        I'm not sure what you think ARIN has to do with UCE/hacking. ARIN allocates
IP addresses. The regional splitting of the registries is more for reasons of
convenience than anything else and I don't believe there's any special reason
ARIN should deny a request just because the addressees will be using the
block out-of-the region. (Though it is recommended that you use the registry
for your region.)

        It is common for companies with a presence in multiple regions to deal with
a single regional registry and then use the blocks where they actually need
them. This is much better than them using two for a variety of reasons
including that it makes the registry better able to assess the justification.
So a multinational company might request all the blocks it needs through ARIN
and it's U.S. office.

        What benefit do you think a policy of strictly enforcing region boundaries
would have?

        DS