[arin-ppml] 2600::/12 LOA
matthew at matthew.at
Sat Mar 29 20:30:13 EDT 2014
On 3/29/2014 10:29 AM, Joe St Sauver wrote:
> Moreover, given BGP route selection rules, I'm not particularly disturbed
> by the presence of that covering announcement: any more specific route should
> immediately be preferred to a broad covering route of the sort employed by
> the IPv6 darknet research effort.
If the BGP listener is able to hear the more-specific route. If the
more-specific is temporarily missing, the traffic goes to the wrong
place. If the more-specific is not heard due to length filters at the
listener, the traffic also goes to the wrong place. In both cases, that
is production network traffic being diverted from where it should be going.
> I believe that ARIN acted properly in supporting this network research, and
> I'd be quite disappointed if ARIN (and other RIRs) discontinued support for
> research of this sort, particularly when carefully done by leading academic
> networking research organizations.
I don't see how ARIN had any business at all supporting research other
than to issue *unique* address space to researchers. In this case, it
wasn't unique, and so there was no way ARIN could supply that space
under the existing numbering policy, and so ARIN should have said "I'm
sorry, we've issued addresses in that space, so we can't issue you
2600::/12 as a unique assignment under section 11 of the NRPM... if
you'd like to announce a covering route in that space, we encourage you
to talk to the organizations that are already using parts of that space,
and the organizations to which you intend to announce that route to"
More information about the ARIN-PPML