[arin-ppml] Squatting the argument against Prop-266 (Was: Solving the squatting problem)

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Fri May 17 02:21:02 EDT 2019


On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:20 AM Michel Py <
michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:

> > David Farmer wrote :
> > Do you think squatting is something new? You have got to be joking!
> > Read RFC 1627, particularly near the bottom of page 3.
>
> I have. You are kind of making my point, actually.
> I was merely reacting to the fact that this whole thing started with prop
> 266, and that people behind it conveniently pushed their agendas about
> hijacking pretending to ignore squatting.
>

You make an excellent point, I think squatting with its prevalence and
longevity make the point that the RIRs, and IANA, don't have the ability to
enforce anything about how routers are configured. The RIRs and IANA simply
coordinate those that consent to be coordinated, the moment anyone
withdraws that consents to their coordination, the RIRs no longer have any
power.

If proponents of Prop-266 believe the RIRs are powerless to do anything
about squatting how do the RIRs have the power to do anything about
accidental or malicious route announcmnets either. I think squatting is the
thread that unravels the argument for Prop-266.

Thanks.

===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190517/a0268c11/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list