Suggestion: Add contact entry to whois

Dean Anderson dean at
Fri Feb 26 23:46:59 UTC 1999

Well, he has a point. 

In this case, you can always 'ring up' his upstream provider, who can
either turn off the whole connection or block the offending host(s). Or
your upstream provider. 

I don't see this as being much different from "no-support" dialin services.
They may not be manned at all.  Most ISP's are planning for unmanned POP's.
It might not be all that long before we have providers with near total
lights out except for bean counters and maintenance people who replace
failed parts in fault tolerant equipment now and then. Some might say we
have that now ;-) Many places aren't 24 hour, and 24 hour staff doesn't
really buy all that much if the Noc operators can't make changes anyway.
So what use is a phone number?

Indeed, I recall that not so long ago people talked about taking contacts
away completely to prevent them from being used 'inappropriately', which I
think they meant as 'contact info is public to other NOC's only, and only
for NOC use, not customer support or anything else'

What people should really start thinking about is automated systems to do
these things, and authentication/trust relationships for other Nocs to make
changes and some kind of penalty for abuse of that system.


At 02:27 PM 2/26/1999 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Feb 1999, Bob Allisat wrote:
>>  FCN gives no contacts for the Domain names
>>  registered here. It is no-one's business who
>>  registers with us. We are not in the business
>>  of acting as snitches for overly snoopy and
>>  prying computer system administrators. If any-
>>  one has a problem they can contact the police
>>  and, accompanied with an appropriate court
>>  order we will be happy to comply with any real,
>>  legitimate investigation. Otherwise fork off,
>>  nosey nerds, it's none of your darned business.
>So in other words if an fcn host is found to be originating denial of
>service attacks, you suggest we contact the local police and FBI rather
>than ringing you up and asking you to disable their ongoing attacks.
>And in the time it takes to process a court order you will continue to
>allow those hosts to originate smurf/pingfloods etc.
>Gotcha. So noted.
>So we now know that when an fcn host is conducting denial of service
>attacks, we should immediately start the paperwork filing for criminal
>negligence and punitive damages ahead of time.
           Plain Aviation, Inc                  dean at

More information about the NANOG mailing list