[arin-ppml] Why should we do Proposal 121

[Jack Bates]

On 12/9/2010 1:33 PM, Charles O'Hern wrote:
> and a personal ignorance question:  Does a subordinate ISP with X
> aggregate allocations advertised through Y direct upstream ISPs end
> up adding X x Y routes to the global tables?
>

I believe that justification is still in order. If an ISP requests PA 
space from another ISP, their current (if any) space would also be taken 
into account. It is also important that any ISP giving space to another 
ISP must show to ARIN the justification of that ISP (just as if the ISP 
had gone to ARIN direct). One could even push it a step further and 
require contracts to be shown to ARIN (similar to contracts used to 
prove multihoming for ASN, but just to prove ISP1 is a customer of ISP2).

Even in v4, if I ask one of my ISP's for a /20, they will give it to me 
if I show justification, but my justification to them is identical to my 
justification to ARIN (includes all allocations from ARIN or other ISPs 
to include my address space as a whole). This is, hopefully, checked 
against the BGP permission lists/justifications done by the ISP as well.

The current v4 model has many loopholes which allow for fraud, and the 
v6 model follows suit. If contracts are required in justification to 
ARIN, we could utilize the corporate entity itself which is assigned a 
single org-id to prohibit duplication. I'm not sure if ARIN would accept 
this, as it means (just like it does with it's own org-ids) that ARIN 
must verify each corporate entity. Only org-id's which are assigned as 
such and classified as an ISP can be assigned space from ARIN or from 
another ISP. This would require more overhead on assigning the ISP 
org-id, but then ARIN would have less work to do in allocations, as ISPs 
would be handling that part.

In short, if you want to lower fraud, create the ISP classification for 
an org-id, and only org-id's with that classification can receive 
allocations; all other org-ids can only receive assignments.


Jack