[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks
barbara.roseman at icann.org
Thu Feb 4 16:14:57 EST 2010
Bill and others,
I think there's a subtle but important distinction that's being lost, and that Cathy and Marla tried to clarify.
ARIN guarantees unique address allocations/assignments, much as IANA guarantees unique address allocations to the RIRs. Unique assignment does not mean that someone else hasn't already decided to use those addresses or to block those addresses through un-updated bogon filters. That is in large measure what is meant by not guaranteeing routeability of the addresses. ARIN, nor any other entity, can guarantee that all the other players will follow the rules.
Additionally, and more controversially, ARIN does not set routing policy for any of the ISPs. As several have pointed out, there is an extremely strong influence by ARIN's allocation and assignment policies on how routing policy is managed, so that whenever ARIN drops the minimal allocation size, ISPs have to make decisions about routing those new smaller announcements, but there is no necessity for them to do so. Most will, because, as Leo pointed out, when you have /22s and /16s in the same netblock, it's hard to come up with TE rules that make a distinction, and that is why ISPs want to have full and frank discussions about the impact to routing whenever such policy is broached (as Marla said).
All of this has been discussed many times. ARIN cannot set routing policy not only because it is not in scope, but because it does not have any authority over the ISPs/CPs who must make the final decisions about what they will and will not accept as routing announcements.
On Feb 4, 2010, at 12:43 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 11:05 AM, cja at daydream.com <packetgrrl at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Per ARIN's Number Resource Policy Manual it says this:
>> "4.1.1. Routability
>> Address allocations and assignments from ARIN are not guaranteed to be
> Hi Cathy,
> I think what's starting to happen is that as a community we're
> recognizing that statement as a major and expensive cop-out. Sure,
> sure, ARIN's not legally liable if my addresses aren't routeable. But
> we all know, wink and nod, that we get addresses from ARIN *because*
> we can use them on the public Internet.
> So, why not fess up to the reality and either:
> 1. Make ARIN officially the routing policy arbiter for North America
> with appropriate care given to checks and balances, or
> 2. Adjust ARIN's process so that ISPs actually do control their own
> routing policies.
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
>> 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.
> Hi Leo,
> The dozen major airlines exert somewhat more than an "extremely large
> influence" over the route I take from DC to Hawaii, and they don't
> have ARIN's geographic monopoly.
> He who controls the IP addresses controls the scope and shape of the
> choices that others can make with the IP addresses. That control can
> be used to create a rich wealth of reasonable choices or it can be
> used to narrow them to just a few.
> Bill Herrin
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML