From: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:34:51 +0200
Dear Mr. Hames,
For the unambiguous identification of institutions (and their
libraries) I recommend you to add a new field for the ISNI to your
registration form.
Most academic institutions have been assigned a unique International
Standard Name Identifier:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Name_Identifier
This ISNI system is supported by national libraries and their Virtual
International Authority File (VIAF) service: https://viaf.org/.
Regards
Joachim Meier
____________________________________________________
Dr.-Ing. Joachim E. Meier
Head of Library
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) (http://www.ptb.de)
PF 3345 Tel. +49-531-592-8131
38023 Braunschweig Fax. +49-531-592-8137
GERMANY E-mail: [log in to unmask]
ISNI: 0000 0001 2186 1887
___________________________________________________
From: Ian Hames <[log in to unmask]
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 08:48:23 +0000
Hi Doug
The main issue is that publishers have never had a way of verifying
the IPs they are asked to add to, or were already in, their access
management systems. Here are some of the main causes of incorrect,
overlapping or duplicated IP ranges we have experienced: -
1. Typos - large ranges added that actually cover multiple
institutions or, in some cases, several countries
2. Housekeeping - expired or incorrect ranges are not deleted for
fear of denying access to bone fide users
3. Housekeeping - Ranges not split out or adjoined correctly
after mergers and acquisitions
4. Misinterpreting - large ranges consisting of multiple
institutions repeated on the single accounts of each included
institution
5. Fraud - rogue intermediaries concealing additional
institutions or their own IPs within the ranges of bone fide customers
Cleaning up the IPs a publisher holds is quite a simple process for
us. Of course, any concerned publisher should get in touch and
libraries will soon be able to check the IPs participating publishers
hold for them at www.theIPregistry.org
Regards
Ian Hames
Sales & Operations Director
www.theIPregistry.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Douglas LaFrenier <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 13:31:12 -0400
Sorry to come to this subject so late, but I wonder if PSI could offer
more details on the apparently bleak state of IP authentication. I
know a bit about this problem from talking to Andrew over the years,
but many people must be astonished at the claim that more than half of
registered IPs are invalid. Is this an issue of fraud, sloppiness, the
nature of how IPs are assigned, or something else? It would be good to
understand how we got to this state.
Regards,
Doug LaFrenier
Consultant
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 6:22 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Andrew Pitts <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 13:13:05 +0000
> >
> > We hope members of this list will be interested in this news, given
> > the concerns about the use of IP addresses as an authentication
> > method for scholarly content.
> >
> > PSI, the organisation which helps publishers eliminate subscription
> > fraud and IP misuse, has announced the launch of a global registry
> > of IP addresses which we hope will benefit the whole community. The
> > IP Registry will make it easier for libraries to communicate any
> > changes in their authentication details to all publishers who sign
> > up to use the service, saving them significant time and reducing
> > errors. The registry already contains 1.5 billion validated IP
> > addresses for over
> > 60,000 content licensing organisations worldwide.
> >
> > The full Press Release can be seen below
> >
> > ************************************************
|
