NEVERMIND! (was: Seeking Google reverse DNS delegation

Large Hadron Collider large.hadron.collider at
Tue Nov 15 05:06:47 UTC 2016

Engage glasses and safety squints.

On 2016-11-13 07:41 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> In message <20161114004152.GA27692 at>,
> Brett Frankenberger <rbf+nanog at> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 03:57:19PM -0800, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>> So... actually someone did tell arin to aim these at
>>> ns1/
>>> I'll go ask arin to 'fix the glitch'.
>> For ...
>> ARIN is delegating to ns[12]
>> The NS records on the servers are pointing to
>> ns[12]
> Right, which is what I said.
> To borrow a word from our former Dear Leader, I misunderestimated the
> level of either (a) devilish deception or else (b) ordinary garden-
> variety sheer technical incompence on the part of the current illicit
> inhabitants of  And really, I don't even give them
> much credit for brains, so it is probably the latter, which is
> somewhat depressing.
I'm not sure what's funnier - Dear Leader, "misunderestimated" or your 
opinion of intelligence level.
> I mean seriously.... geeezz!  What's the world coming to?  It seems that
> the clubs for the low-life deadbeat spammers and IP hijackers are letting
> *anybody* in these days.  I am always annoyed by spam and spammers, but
> I get REALLY annoyed when I get spammed by nitwits who can't even find
> their own asses with both hands when it comes to something as simple as
> setiing up their DNS properly.  Next thing you know, they'll be making
> bonehead novice mistakes like leaving out the trailing periods in the
> Right Places in their zone files.
True fact: I have made such boneheaded mistakes before.
> Honstly, there ought to be a law.  If you're gonna spam me and use all
> these different levels and kinds of deception... massivley violating
> even the minimalist CAN-SPAM Act in the process...  then at least have
> the courtesy, decency, and self-respect to at least do it in a workmanlike
> and competent fashion!  I mean come on!
Like, make it a lessener for the sentence?
> And that includes the bogus info you put into your WHOIS records too!
> Seriously, I give you credit for at least picking out a valid random
> street address, somewhere in fly-over country, but if you're going to
> go to all the trouble to pick yourself out a domain name, set it all
> up and then somehow snooker ARIN into delegating an entire /21's worth
> of reverse DNS to it, then my god, at least pick out something that has
> an air of believability to it, you know, like or
> or something... not which is so totally and transparently
> bogus.
What if it was originally going to be a forum site for couponers who 
aren't arrogant about it, and then they got sidetracked?
> And while you're at it, you should also at least make the WHOIS street
> address and the phone number area code line up, if not with the place
> you are pretending to be (Austin, TX) then at least with each other.
What if you live in BC, Canada (250 code) and your business phone number 
is rate-centred in Vermont, USA (802 code) and the same business 
primarily serves the latter?
> Honestly, Christ!  I've looked at enough phone numbers in enough spammer
> WHOIS records that I haven't needed to Google area code 702 in years to
> know that it ain't nowhere near Indianapolis.  (Duh!)
> Look, spammers are gonna spam and hijackers are gonna hijack.  We all
> know this, and for the most part, we've all come to accept it, because
> there are just too many crooks and/or too many incompetents at every
> level in the system to ever make it all go away.  But if you're gonna
> spam and/or squat on IP space that clearly isn't your's, then at least
> have the dignity to actually *earn* your ill-gotten gains, you know,
> by setting up your deceptions properly.  This crap in
> may fool the folks at ARIN, but nobody else is buying it, because you
> set it up so badly.  You are a discredit to spammers and hijackers,
> and that's saying a lot.  This is your "job" fer chrissake?  Don't you
> have any pride?
> 'nuff said.
> P.S.  Sorry for the rant everybody, but sometimes it just really gets
> to me when I see quite this level of stoopid in the spammer community.
> In general I loath and despise spammers, but for some of them at least,
> I have a grudging respect, because at least they are good at their jobs.
> But these guys ain't among them.  Everything the've done here is so
> transparently bogus that my dog could spot it, and he's blind in one
> eye.
100%. That just puts the icing on the cake.

More information about the NANOG mailing list