[arin-ppml] 2600::/12 LOA
cja at daydream.com
Sat Mar 29 20:55:30 EDT 2014
I just wanted to mention per the research paper all the RIRs gave LOAs for
these covering prefixes. Not just ARIN
"In early October 2012, we contacted each of the five RIRs to request
permission to announce the entire /12 IPv6 address block that had been
allocated to them by IANA. After deliberation, each RIR granted us a Letter
of Authority (LOA) temporarily allowing us to announce these prefixes via
BGP for the duration of our fourmonth experiment"
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at>wrote:
> On 3/29/2014 5:58 AM, John Curran wrote:
>> On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:56 AM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>> On 3/28/14, 11:32 , David Huberman wrote:
>>>> That summary of the issue helps a lot, thank you!
>>>> The question on my mind is:
>>>> Did ARIN provide a written LOA to Merit to announce 2600::/12 ?
>>> I have no direct knowledge one way or the other, I have to defer to ARIN
>>> staff to answer that question. Paging John Curran please. :)
>>> However, In addition to what CJ referenced, the presentation given at
>>> RIPE 66 (slide 7) implies that ARIN and the other RIRs did provide an LOA,
>>> doesn't say "written" but again I think that is implied as well.
>> Yes, ARIN provided the referenced LOA, which is a bit of a surprise to
>> me as well.
> Here's what surprises me: that it is ARIN's business at all to provide an
> LOA allowing someone to announce a BGP route. I could have sworn that I
> have read hundreds of times that ARIN is *only* in the business of running
> a database in which they maintain unique registrations, and that routing
> policy is of no concern to ARIN.
> Either ARIN added a database entry assigning 2600::/12 to Merit, in which
> case I am confused for several reasons, starting with it not being a unique
> Or ARIN didn't add a database entry assigning 2600::/12 to Merit, in which
> case what could the letter possibly have said?
> I'm looking into the details on this now, but here's the
>> short version of what I know at this point -
>> ARIN has often cooperated with Merit on darknet research activities, and
>> this includes providing authorization to enable looking into latent
>> on space not yet issued by ARIN. Some typical examples that come to mind
>> include new /8's just received from IANA and the /10 for shared transition
>> We were asked to cooperate with Merit on darknet research on ARIN's IPv6
>> 2600::/12 space and I authorized the effort. Apparently, the effort also
>> included the routing an overall covering prefix and I missed that aspect
>> of the project. Aside from the technical concerns outlined here, there
>> is also a very valid question of whether ARIN should ever be involved in
>> routing authorization covering already issued space, since presumably the
>> same dialogue and consensus in the operator community (that should be a
>> prerequisite for such an experiment) should also suffice as the approval
>> with ISPs when it comes to researchers actually inserting the necessary
> I think there's a valid question of whether ARIN should ever be involved
> in routing authorization. Full stop.
>> Going forward, ARIN will not issue routing authorization that covers any
>> address space issued to others without community-developed policy that
>> specifically directs us to do so.
> I would hope that in the absence of both community-developed policy *and*
> a change in ARIN's chartered mission, ARIN would not issue routing
> authorization that covers any address space, with the possible exception of
> the addresses assigned to ARIN itself for its own servers.
> Matthew Kaufman
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML