IP-Echelon Compliance

Baldur Norddahl baldur.norddahl at gmail.com
Tue Oct 13 14:56:59 UTC 2015

On 13 October 2015 at 16:17, Mike Hammett <nanog at ics-il.net> wrote:

> So even when they give an avenue to resolve the issue, people still
> complain... *sigh*

IP-Echelon used a faulty automated script to harvest abuse addresses and
then expect everyone else to use a manual process to fix their errors,
including a captcha. Where do we send the bill for labour?

The ranges that we receive complaints from are totally unrelated to us.
Have never been owned by us or any entity related to us. Is not even
registred in the same country. Are not numerically close to any of our IP
ranges. The ranges usually have a valid abuse address in whois and it is
not ours. It is a bit of mystery how they came up with our abuse address.

My conclusion is that I have zero obligations to tell anyone that I
received an abuse report that is not for anything my users did. Especially
not after already contacting the sender and they continue to send wrong
reports. So I can just discard it. And with it I can discard all the
reports that _are_ for our own users, because why is it my responsibility
to write a filter? If they send me accurate information, I may want to
consider forwarding the stuff, but if they are lazy, why would I not also
choose the lazy way out?

Adding IP-Echelon to the spam filter is very easy.

Finding our ranges is extremely easy. You will find a complete list here
and many other places: https://stat.ripe.net/as60876#tabId=routing. Someone
from IP-Echelon is reading this, so go remove any prefixes not on that
list. If you do not, then you choose to be lazy and thereby choose to be
filtered as spam.



More information about the NANOG mailing list