[arin-ppml] [EXT] Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

Jimmy Hess mysidia at gmail.com
Wed May 8 16:15:32 EDT 2019


On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 2:19 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
>
> On May 7, 2019, at 7:46 PM, Marilson Mapa <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...

> I mentioned the creation of BGP that replaced EGP, with policy-based
> routing, a routing based on a set of non-technical rules, defined by
> Autonomous Systems, to BGP4 designed to withstand the problems caused by
> the great growth of the Internet.
>
> Yes, I remember it well. BGP4’s major enhancement vs. prior versions was
> the introduction of CIDR to cope with the growth of the routing table. This
> was a problem encountered well before the frenzy of e-commerce, web sites,
> etc. Literally, people were still managing routers with Telnet. BARRnet was
> still propagating RIP announcements from their customers into BGP. The
> security model at the time on the internet was literally that of a small
> town where only good actors were expected to participate.
>

> I have a file with 1.3 GB of criminal attitudes from ISPs, Registrars and
> ICANN, protecting and hiding spammers and scammers. Scammers who were often
> the providers themselves. Since 2014 I have sent spam and scam reports to
> these institutions. There were hundreds of ISPs, and everyone, without
> exception, protected and concealed their customers. So keep these old
> wives’ tale for your grandchildren.
>
> On the internet back then, a lot happened in 8 years… BGP4 was introduced
> with RFC-4271 in 2006. We must consider the environment of that time when
> we are going to judge those who designed and built BGP4, not the
> environment of 2014.
>

Just one thing.... 2006?   More like 1994.
If BGP Version 4 was a person: he/she would be old enough to drink.
Proposed standard for BGP4 was RFC1654: later obsoleted by RFC1771, then
4271.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1654


I agree with Owen to say something was a "flawwed design";   is to say that
this
was because the designer made a mistake:  which I am not convinced is the
case.

You need to understand what the original environment was for BGP4:  what the
original problem was.    For the solution the conceptual task to be
accomplished:
the objectives,  requirements,  constraints,  and assumptions behind the
system are.

The 2019 internet, and even the 2006 internet was likely not a reasonably
forseeable
use for a design that had happened before 1994.

--
-JH
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190508/bb37a518/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list