[arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Oct 29 13:13:46 EDT 2008

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Kevin Kargel
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 6:52 AM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The Library Book Approach to IPv4 Scarcity
> Rants first, then content.. Top posted because it didn't fit 
> well inline..
> What you are proposing could easily turn in to an excessive 
> annual manpower requirement for an ISP.  It could easily be 
> forgotten or mis-assigned with terrible consequences.  
> We have enough red tape in the IT world already.  Don't create more.
> It amazes me how many people feel free to spend my money.  
> "Do what I want or I will send you a bill"..

And, yet you see nothing hypocritical about your own participation
in a public forum that's intended to create rules that cost other
people money.

When orgs are using numbering on the Internet they are using a
public resource and the public has a right to tell them how to use it.
This is no different than the Law & Order people who tell me
that I can't speed 80Mph on the freeway, even though I know what
I'm doing and could do so safely.

When the day comes that those conservatives let me do what I want
on the freeway then I'll listen to them when they tell me that I
can't force them to accept flag burning as legal.

I disagree with the proposal myself but I am not trying to argue
that the community has no right to institute it if the community
decides it's in the best interest.

> There is 
> nothing wrong with charging for a service rendered, I don't 
> mind paying for something that I get value from, but please 
> keep niggling fingers out of my budget.
> There is already a requirement to keep contact information 
> updated.  ARIN can already use existing policy to reclaim 
> abandoned space.  ARIN is very good at what they do and there 
> are real reasons they have or have not taken action on these networks.
> As I have commented other places, if we want to restrict 
> abandoned or bogon networks a much better idea would be to 
> publish the contact update date in the network record.  This 
> data could be used by the publishers of various bogon lists 
> that the community can take advantage of to prune routing 
> tables.  If the community is actively concerned ARIN could 
> publish an "official" bogon list that could be incorporated 
> into routing decisions. This would actually not hurt the 
> network operators who are legitimately using stale contact 
> networks for peering connections, and would allow the 
> community to protect itself from hijackers.  As I think about 
> it I am surprised there is not an official ARIN bogon list 
> already, it seems like a natural function.  Maybe it does 
> exist and I am ignorant of it.  Please feel free to educate me.

I an concerned that a bogon list is counterproductive,
the point is that when IPv4 runout happens, there will be much incentive
to identify and reclaim abandonded IPv4 space.  If a subnet is
discovered to be hijacked, then instead of listing it on a
bogon list, it should be immediately reclaimed and reassigned.

Creating an official bogon list may hinder the ability of
ISP's to absorb "dirty" subnets.

The situation is the same as when you have a large city (I'll
pick on Detroit for example) that has a core that is rotting
due to abandonded buildings.  The buildings become a mess and
get covered with graffitti.  If the city ignores it, then you
end up with block after block of run-down buildings that attract
more graffitti and vandalism.  It's much better to intitute
recovery proceedings on the land, take it back to public ownership,
and if necessary -GIVE AWAY-
the land if you can't sell it, to a property owner who is willing
to spend the money to go in and gut the building and put
something new there.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list