[arin-ppml] [EXT] Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation
owen at delong.com
Sat May 4 15:09:23 EDT 2019
> On May 3, 2019, at 10:13 , Carlos Friaças via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2019, Andrew Bagrin wrote:
>> I'm curious why do people not want to let ARIN try to start getting involved to help resolve the issue of hijacking?
I don’t accept the premise of the question. I think people are perfectly willing to see ARIN expand its involvement in
resolving issues of hijacking to the extent that ARIN can have a meaningful impact on the situation. I think others
in this discussion have a greatly inflated opinion of ARIN’s powers and capabilities in this regard.
> <proposer hat on>
> This is uncharted territory. Some people fear the unknown.
I think that is overly dismissive and an inaccurate assessment of most of the opposition to this proposal.
Indeed, IMHO, this is actually well charted territory as similar discussions of ARIN’s ability to curtail routing
problems have been held before in this and other fora with the consistent outcome that after a period of education,
most in the discussion arrive at the same conclusion:
1. Most of the resource hijackers are not those who have contracts with ARIN with one notable exception.
2. Those with a contract with ARIN generally are those who have committed resource fraud in order to
obtain said contract with ARIN and upon sufficient proof, ARIN already has policies and procedures
in place to reclaim the resources.
3. Stopping hijacking requires an action by those who run routers. ARIN does not run (many) routers.
4. ARIN does not control the businesses who run routers.
5. ARIN does not have the authority to dictate business practices to ISPs beyond those related to the
maintenance of the ARIN registration database.
6. The theory that ARIN allocates exclusive rights to use number resources on some amorphous
concept known as “the global internet” is a novel idea, but not particularly proximal to reality.
>> Why would anyone be against ARIN having a process to help resolve these issues? Sure we can question how effective it will be, but anything will be more effective than nothing, and by actually doing, failing and learning, ARIN will only improve and refine the process. We will all learn from this.
> I've learned a lot between proposal versions in RIPE, LACNIC and ARIN.
I have no opposition to doing something if we can get a proposal that offers something that ARIN can do.
The first step must be to identify what ARIN can do and accept what is beyond ARIN’s mandate and capabilities.
More information about the ARIN-PPML