The DDOS problem & security BOF: Am i mistaken?

Dean Anderson dean at
Fri Oct 17 02:31:21 UTC 2008

Since you so many facts wrong, a response is necessary.

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:

> 	I actually was thinking of the ARIN list that you had the temporary
> ban on :

I don't have a page on this because it is currently the subject of
litigation. However, since you brought it up, I have to defend myself.  
As my attorney pointed out to ARIN, this ban was based on a fabrication
by ARIN. Among other things, ARIN also threatened to make false claims
that I sent spam to the ARIN lists.  ARIN has also published the
communications between my lawyer and ARIN's lawyer, which is very

This particular ban disrupted and ended a discussion about the lack of
quorum in elections that brought Bradner, Curran, Howard, Manning, Vixie
and Woodcock to the ARIN Board of Directors.  Notices were recently sent
(certified mail) to all six ARIN Board Members informing them of the
lack of quorum in their election and that they are not authorized to act
as Board Members.  The ban has prevented other voting members from
learning these facts.  (Manning and Woodcock have so far refused to
accept the certified letters)

In the meantime, the Board (Vixie et al) have tried to alter the ARIN
bylaws to change the quorum requirements. But because the Board members
voting on these changes weren't validly elected, their modifications are
also invalid.

Board members (e.g. Ray Plzak) also have a duty to object to improper
acts; such as allowing invalidly elected board members to act as board

This might be a tad legal, but NANOG has had seminars on internet law,
so some basic business law is just a part of any operator's skillset.  
Everyone should know that membership rights to democratic participation
are intangible property, and should know that taking property (including
membership rights to democratic participation) on false pretenses is
fraud. Threatening to take such property by force or fear is extortion.
I encourage everyone to read
particularly United States v. Teamsters Local 560.

> 	and then the permanent ban :

Also based on fabrication, by a non-neutral body of Vixie/NANOG cronies.  
My attorney is preparing a response to this, so I can't comment very 
much about it. 

> 	as for banning from NANOG, there is a message, purportedly from
> you :
> contains "So Harris banned me from NANOG." . Not sure if thats the
> meeting, the NANOG list, or one of the NANOG/Merit other lists. 

The list, I don't know if this applies to meetings. However, Jeremy
Porter threatened 'Dead Anderson' with

  "Maybe with any luck he'll show up at the next nanog meeting
   and be suprised in a dark alley."

So I haven't attended any meetings where there will be NANOG people
present without much security.

It is interesing to note however that the NANOG-affiliated ARIN AUP
committee claimed in June 2008 that this threat wasn't made.

> Also, in :
> 	I see "So, effective May 4 2005, Harris again banned Anderson.
> Although the new "reformed" rules require a limit of 6 months,
> Anderson remains banned as of April 16th, 2006. It seems permanent."

This refers to the NANOG reform movement in 2005.  If that's really not 
clear from the page, I'll edit the page for clarity.

> 	but I think that refers to another NANOG group, dnsop.

DNSOP isn't a NANOG group. Its an IETF group.

In fact, you might find everything on 

Hope that clears up the facts.


Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000   

More information about the NANOG mailing list