[ppml] Effects of explosive routing table growth on ISP behavior
steveb at eagle.ca
Thu Nov 1 21:17:41 EDT 2007
Scott Leibrand wrote:
> Brian Johnson wrote:
>> MY ENTIRE POINT IS THAT ARIN NEEDS TO STAY OUT OF ROUTING POLICY!
> I understand your point, I just disagree with it, and am presenting
> arguments to the contrary.
Am I the only one here who can see that nearly every thread on this list
lately has more to do with the operational aspect of IPv4 routing than
it does creating forward-going policy?
If every word that was spent on arguing whether ARIN should or shouldn't
be involved in routing policy was spent on positive motions to avoid
routing collapse, the IPv4 runout/routing slot problems would be solved
If ARIN should stay out of routing policy, then operators should stay
out of numbering policy. That's like saying that my local council should
impose new bylaws without consulting it's constituents, isn't it?
ARIN shouldn't *create* routing policy, but it sure should have a
serious interest in it's consequences, when it passes policy that has
one hell of a direct affect on it.
More information about the ARIN-PPML