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

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Fri May 17 04:27:37 EDT 2019

And just to confirm, the other co-author agrees on all this.


El 17/5/19 10:06, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Carlos Friaças via ARIN-PPML" <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net en nombre de arin-ppml at arin.net> escribió:

    On Fri, 17 May 2019, David Farmer wrote:
    > 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.  
    I can't believe where this has gone!
    The RIRs are a KEY piece of the puzzle to make the Internet work.
    > If proponents of Prop-266 believe the RIRs are powerless to do anything about squatting
    The proponents of Prop-266 (well, at least me) don't believe Prop-266 will 
    solve all the issues and 100% of abuse around Internet numbers.
    We *do* believe it's a needed step in the right direction. It might need 
    some tweaks, yes. Let's do it in a constructive manner, please.
    If anyone else is keen on addressing squatting, great.
    If someone thinks hijacks can't be addressed because squatting is 
    impossible to address, bad luck.
    What is impossible is to address everything with just _one_ proposal.
    >  how do the RIRs have the power to do anything about accidental or
    No. No. No. No. No. No. "Accidental" is out of scope in Prop-266.
    > malicious route announcmnets either.
    "Persistent/continued, intentional route announcements".
    > 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
    > ===============================================_______________________________________________
    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.

IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list