On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 23:24 +0000, Graeme Fowler wrote: > On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 00:22 +0100, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> > okay, perhaps it makes sense, but their claim that it is Policy Based is
> > not true. I was surprised to find one of our C-nets in the PBL, this
> > was certainly not added by us, and our terms of use do not prohibit the
> > use of port 25.
>
> Depending on granularity, I would expect that "small" blocks - say /22
> and smaller - may get listed in the PBL as part of a larger assignment
> sub-allocated by an ISP acting as an LIR or equivalent.
>
> I wouldn't be at all surprised to see smaller "upstream" ISPs just
> listing their entire RIPE delegations, regardless of the sub-allocations
> they have made. It's incorrect, but very easy to do - if you have
> several hundred blocks to manage.
>
> Did you get your block delisted without issue?
I've been unable to find contact information (let me know off-list if
you have an address I can use). I was able to submit a single IP via
the web interface. it is of course protected by both captcha and e-mail
confirmation, so I don't much appreciate the prospect of repeating the
process 255 times...
--
Kjetil T.
