[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks
bicknell at ufp.org
Thu Feb 4 14:54:58 EST 2010
In a message written on Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 12:45:54PM -0700, cja at daydream.com wrote:
> little end sites. Also we had no control over (and neither does ARIN)
> the filtering policies of large ISPs.
There is a nuance in here that most people seem to ignore when
making their point.
ARIN does not control routing at any ISP.
ARIN has an extremely large influence on ISP's routing policies.
These two statements can be completely true at the same time. Sure,
ARIN was not able to reach out to an ISP for you and wap them over
the head with a stick to say "Route Cathy's network", so you're
statement is 100% valid. However, there is also ample evidence
that over time ISP's filtering policies tend to mirror ARIN's
allocation guidelines. Indeed, the problem you describe has gone
away as ISP's have mirrored ARIN's policies.
Because of this situation, I argue it is extremely important for
those making policy to consider the effects on routeability. Not
because ARIN can take a stick to someone, but because it is highly
likely to become the rule of the land over time by default. I also
think there is a note of caution involved as well; the current
system works well in part because over time ISP's policies mirror
ARIN's. While that is not required, I believe it's relatively
trival to show that if this were not the case costs for everyone
would go up. ARIN would see more blocks returned and fraud in
requests looking for routable blocks, ISP's and businesses would
have to deal with those who received unroutable networks through
ignorace or accident.
Routablilty is one of many concerns when drafting policy. It should no
more be ignored than it should be assumed to be the end-all be-all.
Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML