[arin-ppml] prop266 - re-framing the discussion

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at gmail.com
Thu May 2 11:29:38 EDT 2019


On 02/05/2019 12:16, Scott Leibrand wrote:
>
> ARIN’s only authority is to over their registry of who “has” which 
> addresses, so the only thing I can imagine they could do would be to 
> threaten to revoke unrelated registrations from a transit provider who 
> willfully or negligently accepted the BGP announcement of space from 
> an entity it wasn’t registered to. But if tier 1 transit providers 
> aren’t willing to filter, let alone depeer, each other over hijacking 
> today, it seems unlikely they’d be willing to stop accepting formerly 
> legitimate prefixes from a peer or customer network just because ARIN 
> is trying to take that space away to punish the network for accepting 
> an unrelated hijacked announcement.

It doesn't really seem to be this the discussion about Transit providers 
accepting or not certain announcements. Even if a Transit Provider 
accepts announcements from people who are not responsible for an 
allocation nor has authorization to do that they should only be warned 
to take correction measures. I don't think the main aim of the propose 
is do anything with Transit providers.
Even in a hypothesis a Transit provider has no filters a hijack will not 
occur if a hijacker doesn't initiate it.
>
> Scott
>
> On May 2, 2019, at 7:18 AM, Adam Thompson <athompson at merlin.mb.ca 
> <mailto:athompson at merlin.mb.ca>> wrote:
>
>> Instead of focusing on whether the current proposal is or isn’t in 
>> scope, I suggest we re-cast the discussion as follows:
>>
>>  1. So far, we have unanimous community agreement that BGP hijacking
>>     is bad.
>>  2. So far, we have broad agreement that “something ought to be done”
>>     about BGP hijacking, although detailed opinions vary significantly.
>>  3. So what (else) *_can_* ARIN do about it?  (Caveat: the answer
>>     “/nothing/” is unacceptable to a significant proportion of PPML
>>     participants.)
>>
>> My suggested direction to the AC and/or the board would therefore be: 
>> */_Find_/* something ARIN can do to help combat the problem (more 
>> effectively).  If this requires expanding the scope of ARIN’s 
>> operations or policies, bring that back to the membership (possibly 
>> via PPML?) with the accompanying financial & legal analysis, as usual.
>>
>> Now the question becomes: what is the most appropriate mechanism, 
>> within ARIN’s existing policies, to bring a request like that to the 
>> AC and/or Board?  It seems clear to me that the petition already 
>> underway here is not meeting, and will not meet, the needs of the 
>> community very well.
>>
>> -Adam
>>
>> *Adam Thompson*
>> Consultant, Infrastructure Services
>> *<image001.png>*
>> 100 - 135 Innovation Drive
>> Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8
>> (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
>> athompson at merlin.mb.ca <mailto:athompson at merlin.mb.ca>
>> www.merlin.mb.ca <http://www.merlin.mb.ca/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net 
>> <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience 
>> any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> 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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190502/41f890fc/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list