[ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.

[Dean Anderson]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Owen DeLong wrote:

> > It's IANA's problem.  It's ARIN's problem.  It's DARPA and the DOD's
> > problem.  It may turn out to be the courts problem, but most of all,
> > it's the community's problem.  Should netblock ownership and routing
> > slots descend into some sort of Mad Max type of future we're all
> > going to loose, big time.  Secure routing is never going to work if
> > we can't figure out who gets the certificate.
> >
> Actually, Leo, I think that paragraph may have hit on a good portion
> of the solution:
> 
> ARIN is not required to provide any NEW services to legacy holders
> without an RSA.  I doubt anyone will dispute that.

I dispute that. ARIN is required to perform the services that IANA has
delegated to it.  Legacy services are part of that delegation. This is
like saying ARIN has no obligation to cart the boxes of legacy records
to a new office. Or to convert legacy records to a new electronic
format.  Any service that required, ARIN is required to perform for
everyone.

I think you still fail to grasp that ARIN is an agent of IANA, that is
to say, the US Government; That the records and assignments belong
ultimately to the government, not to ARIN.

> If secure routing starts using those certificates and becomes popular,
> then, the ability to get a certificate becomes a carrot for legacy
> holders to sign an RSA.

But, secure routing (of the sort you envision) is a pipedream.  The
notion of mad-max advertisement of IP blocks is just nonsense.  
Advertising someone elses active block would be a civil and/or criminal
violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Wiretap Act. [as
Chris Morrow discovered for advertising /22 masks to 198.3.136/21, and
as Martin Hannigan quite nearly found out for advertising a route to
Sanford Wallace's net block in 1996. If I hadn't met Hannigan at the
Cambridge Brewing Company that night, I think he wouldn't have told
Wallace that it was all an accident.]

This fear-mongering is no different than previous fear-mongering.

Like RADB, this certificate scheme is just another good-old-boys club,
and another tool for abuse like the SORBS hijacked list.  Sure, there is
some reason to think these might have been good ideas, but not enough
reason to do so honestly, and not enough reason to avoid abuse and get
universal buy-in.  [I quit RADB when Susan Harris blocked my email from
Merit.  That block was part of the 1990's retaliation for saying that
Antitrust applied to blacklists and ECPA applied to ISPs. Others quit
for similar reasons.]

I don't think I'll be asking for a certificate. But I expect if ARIN
offers certificate services, other Legacy holders might want
certificates, and will be entitled to the same services as everyone
else.

BTW, Airports also have legacy issues, too. 50 and 99 year leases given
out years ago.  The legacy's always win on anything that just involves
money.  Sure, build a new runway, and it might be necessary to tear down
a hangar.  But a lease is a lease, and you can't get out just because
you want to charge more money.  Every once in a while someone will try,
though. Its best to get that item last on the agenda so you can leave
early.

		--Dean


-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000