[arin-ppml] Proposal insanity --- an open letter
gbonser at seven.com
Tue Feb 22 20:46:51 EST 2011
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> Behalf Of Tony Hain
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 2:49 PM
> To: 'John Curran'; 'Warren Johnson'
> Cc: 'ARIN-PPML List'
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Proposal insanity --- an open letter
> I never said ARIN directed the configuration of ISP routers. The point
> of a
> routing registry is to be the source of truth about a resource, the
> of that resource, and thereby the valid originator of routing entries
> related to that resource. Whatever you want to call it, ARIN does
> that. The dynamics of routing protocols are subject to the whims and
> business relationships that evolve between operators, but the source
> validity in registration is held by IANA and the set of RIRs.
Well, this is actually the source of an earlier comment I made about the
proposals making legacy blocks "easier to hijack". That seems to be
what this is facilitating, in practice. If you remove them from whois,
one of two things (or both) happen. Either people start hijacking parts
of that space and there is no way to verify the real owner of it and/or
it gets put in the "full bogons" database and people who use that for
their own routing filters find the traffic blocked.
There is absolutely no way I am ever going to favor anything that
changes the rules for the legacy networks or attempts to coerce them
into doing anything. The purpose here seems to be a round-about way to
enable the eventual confiscation and re-issuing of space. So you have
network space that was granted under one set of rules but now you must
comply with a different set of rules to keep it. Forget it. Stop
having dreams of taking other people's address allocations even if they
aren't using it.
This entire exercise stinks to high heaven.
More information about the ARIN-PPML