nanog mailing list archives

Re: Question of privacy with reassigned resources


From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 08:58:48 -0400

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 08:04:47 EDT, William Herrin said:
If you feel that way, I suggest you take the issue up on the ARIN
public policy mailing list. Solicit public consensus for a change in
handling for SWIPs for "apartment complexes as ISP resellers." Absent
such a change, redacting identity and contact info for the apartment
management company remains simple fraud.

I'm not at all convinced that mere redaction qualifies as fraud. It certainly
qualifies as *deceptive* - but does it rise to "fraudulent"?   Is the fact that
I use a Mail Boxes Etc-type service and don't accept mail at my home address
because it's a very physically insecure mailbox fraudulent?  Yes, it's somewhat
deceptive, because it's not my actual home address.  But unless you stretch
"deception for personal gain" to the point where "gain" is "I don't want mail
stolen from my mailbox", I don't think it's actual fraud.

Valdis,

It takes some creative reading to think I claimed using an alternate
but still correct address (e.g. supplied by mailboxes etc.)
constituted fraud. Alternate != redacted.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin () dirtside com  bill () herrin us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004


Current thread: