[arin-ppml] Clarification on "a block designated for that purpose"

Steve Bertrand steve at ibctech.ca
Wed Feb 24 20:07:24 EST 2010

Although I haven't had a chance to thoroughly read the Staff Assessments
within the recent Draft Policies, I just want to make something clear.

When I came up with 'a block designated/reserved for that purpose', I
was not attempting to segregate the IP space into another classful

I clearly understand that ARIN is not, or will not be in a position to
create/modify routing policy, nor do I (at this time) think that they
should be.

My engineering hat says this:

- extreme influx of traffic from x:x::/x
- my automation software senses this, and looks up the origin
- it's an ARIN allocation, and it falls within the 'special IX' space
- we weight the traffic differently, and allow it for an extended period

- same situation, but from a /48 within ARIN assigned PA space
- same auto tools identify that there is no SWIP
- it might be an attack
- route is [sink|black] holed, and ops are notified

- same situation again, from a non-connected network
- all space in this regard is known via ARIN, because it is from a block
reserved for the purpose
- route filters sink immediately, notify ops, and take necessary steps
to shut them down

- whether custom or [insert very expensive network] software, if the
space is going to be segregated in ANY regard, it is in the best
interest of the entire community to be able to have a safe understanding
of the identity of what that IP address is, and what its purpose is.

Operations hat:

- private /48? block all
- single-homed /48? block dirty feed, and notify community of bad provider
- leaky IX? make proper contact
- advertising someone else's space? heh

My point is, is that having ALL IP space alloc'd/assigned out of blocks
reserved for that purpose is for `informational purposes'.

I'm not trying to imply a new classful strategy. Classful was a
technological issue that was implemented in hardware/software. What I've
been hoping for was a policy-based strategy, that would give each and
everyone the opportunity to adhere to it, or not.

There are no restrictions. Again... I'm not asking for ARIN to create a
"boundary" here. As an engineer/operator, I just would find it easier
that if the IP space was to be segregated, that it be segregated in a
way that it be documented publicly, so that ops *could* make
routing/forwarding decisions on the documentation if they *chose* to.


ps. the v6 was an example. Having the same _documented_ segregation for
v4 would be just as fantastic.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list