[ppml] RIR's should have power to suspend Member's registration in specified circumstances

[John M. Brown]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Allen Smith [mailto:easmith at beatrice.rutgers.edu] 
> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 3:51 PM
> To: john at chagres.net
> Cc: chris at telespan.co.uk; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] RIR's should have power to suspend 
> Member's registration in specified circumstances
> 
> 
> In message <001a01c27c6b$69bcc900$f9ecdfd8 at laptoy> (on 25 
> October 2002 15:13:38 -0600), john at chagres.net (John M. Brown) wrote:
> > how do you intend to have the RIR's tell me what I can
> > and can't accept in my routing table ?
> 
> In the case of an ISP doing business in the US, if someone 
> else now is listed as the proper user of said IP addresses in 
> the official listing (so long as ARIN is regarded as official 
> by ICANN, which is in turn regarded as official by the US 
> government - especially given that the US government's 
> Department of Commerce governs the root servers) but an ISP 
> is refusing to treat them as such, the new user now has a 
> pretty good cause for a lawsuit and injunction against said ISP.

So I take me ARIN allocated IP space and route it from Panama.

Now I don't have US authority to worry about.

The point being missed here is that RIR's should not and
do not control routing tables.
 
> > How do they enforce telling me what I can and can't have
> > in my routing table?
> 
> It can also mean changing the entries in the root servers, as 
> another means of making it clear who's the proper user of 
> said IP addresses. I prefer this means, personally, since I 
> don't like getting government involved.

What specific entry/change in the root server would you make?


> > What happens when the RIR makes a mistake and drops 
> YAHOO.COM for 28 
> > hours ?
> 
> A period of 5 days is reasonable. If it isn't corrected by 
> then, that's when you start punishing.

RIR's are not in the business of telling ISP's how to run
their business.  In the US that would violate various
anti-trust laws at a min.