[arin-ppml] Proposal insanity --- an open letter
To my understanding ARIN is an IP registry. Nothing more and nothing less. If we want ARIN to become a routing (or any other standards) authority I would think we need to make some adjustments to the mission statement at the very least.
Then comes the problem of getting the world to recognize ARIN as a routing authority. I don't think that's as simple as announcing "because we say so".
If you want ARIN records to be authoritative for routing perhaps the proper venue for enacting that would be the IETF and changes to the various routing protocol RFC's.
IMHO one of the best ways to get people to stop taking ARIN seriously will be to get too big for our britches and start trying to make unenforceable rules in areas where we have no authority.
I am sure wiser people than myself will chime in and let me know where my thinking is flawed.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Tony Hain
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:18 PM
> To: 'John Curran'
> Cc: 'ARIN-PPML List'
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Proposal insanity --- an open letter
> John Curran wrote:
> > On Feb 23, 2011, at 12:48 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
> > > ... given the many times that John has specifically noted on this
> > > list that he views and promotes the ARIN whois database as a routing
> > > registry,
> > Tony -
> > We go at length to point out that the ARIN Whois database is not
> > routing registry and does not control routing (reference: NRPM 4.1.1),
> > so please cite some of these "many times" or correct yourself asap.
> > We run the ARIN Whois according to the community-developed policy,
> > and it's quite possible that ISPs find it useful for configuration
> > as a result, but ultimately ISPs decide what to route or not route
> > on their own.
> This note is a prime example. Rather than simply and clearly stating that
> the ARIN whois database is not and "MUST NOT BE USED FOR A ROUTING
> REGISTRY", there is a backhanded promotion that we recognize the
> smart people' use it as one because it is constructed with exactly the
> they have told us to put in for that use. The implication being that if
> don't use it as one you are not part of the 'smart' group because all the
> data is there and ready to go. So it becomes the defacto registry.
> If it is a defacto routing registry, then policy proposals need to
> the implications of that. Continuing the two-faced 'we say nothing about
> routing' while at the same time all policy proposals are judged by 'the
> impact on routing will be ...' is not helping promote the perception that
> the RIRs are independent. Playing the 'we tell you it isn't a registry'
> while simultaneously recognizing it is 'the defacto routing registry for
> region' is not helping either.
> At the end of the day, the inherent conflict of interest between 'those
> have and want to keep others out, and those that want in' has been placed
> squarely in ARIN's lap. While resources were abundant it was not too hard
> get community agreement on who would be denied a seat at the table, though
> arguably there probably was never a valid reason to have a minimum size
> allocation. While I can hear the screams about routing table size, the
> intentional deaggregation by those who got the resources exposes the
> in the argument. In any case, ARIN is in the position where 'legally'
> has to be a disconnect between resource management and operational
> but 'practically' they are tied at the hip because the members who pay the
> most insist on getting the results that favor them.
> > /John
> > John Curran
> > President and CEO
> > ARIN
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.