Re: Hijacked Blocks

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Chris Marlatt <cmarlatt () rxsec com> wrote:
> Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > The end of the discussion was along the lines of: "Yes, we know this
> > guy is bad news, but he always comes to us with the proper paperwork
> > and numbers, there's nothing in the current policy set to deny him
> > address resources. Happily though he never pays his bill after the
> > first 12 months so we just reclaim whatever resources are allocated
> > then."  (yes, comments about more address space ending up on BL's were
> > made, and that he probably doesn't pay because after the first 3
> > months the address space is 'worthless' to him...)
> >
> > How should this get fixed? Is it possible to make policy to address
> > this sort of problem?
> >
> > -chris
>
> If this is the case one could argue that ARIN should be reserving this
> "worthless" address space to be used when they receive similar requests
> in the future. There's no reason personX should get fresh, clean address
> space when they make additional requests.

That implies some process changes inside ARIN (I think) and
effectively saving 'your old space' for some period of time in escrow
for you. This doesn't sound unreasonable, perhaps you put forth some
policy verbiage on ppml?

-chris