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

Marilson Mapa marilson.mapa at gmail.com
Thu May 23 13:46:31 EDT 2019


Owen wrote:

Ø  I don’t mind waiting two weeks for your reply… I’ll still be here.

Careful what you wish for...

Owen, I'm sorry I used you, but I knew that if I poke the bear I would have
material to spare.

About the paradise you described and that Steve Jobs described a very
different environment.

You wrote:

Ø  Actually, I visited such a place in 2005 as an adult.  The place was
Naithon, Phuket, Thailand.

Ø  It is not a hippy community at all and I did not encounter any Marijuana
there.

I believe that you have visited such a place at Thailand. Do you know why?
Who smuggles drugs in Thailand is likely to be sentenced to death. I ask
you: Is it for this reason that you have turned the Internet into a lawless
land where sociopaths dominate, stealing people's information every day and
turning our mail box into an extension of your toilet bowl? 500 billion a
day ... dear, what hunger huh?

Never in the history of mankind so few have done so much harm to so many. A
hurray to BAADD, three cheers to GGM21C.

Ø  I was running routers. You, by your own admission, were not running
routers at the time, so perhaps accept that I know somewhat more about this
history than you do.

I'm pretty sure you know all about it, but this story will not be told by
you. And when the actual story will be told you will be remembered because
YOU WAS RUNNING ROUTERS. And you will also be remembered for making it
difficult to craft rules that would turn the Internet into a
NaithonPhuketThailand.

Ø  The security model at the time on the internet was literally that of a
small town where only good actors were expected to participate.

Really? How was this put into practice? It was required of the interested
parties a certificate of moral idoneity issued by the Police? It is
admirable the effort you make to paint the sociopaths of the time as
righteous and respectable people.

Ø  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.

The mood of the time was shit where humanity's extinction in a nuclear war
was feared. What matters are the acts that preceded the 2014 environment
that has worsened every year. The current environment is not the result of
a plague from Olympus. It is the result of the collective action of a
community that has decided to enrich itself by irritating and robbing
billions of people. And it is the result of premeditated and criminal
action in considering everything "out of the scope" to maintain the
lucrative but criminal status quo.

Those who write their own AUPs, Codes of Conduct and PDPs do not have the
right to use the expression "out of scope". If use it, they will be at
least accomplice of illicit activity. They will be covering up illicit acts
of their customers. The name of this is Mafia. Not even the Italian mafia
managed to implement something as efficient and not imputable and as
comprehensive as the BBM21C.

Ø  It is in the scope of those who run routers…

Then it is in your scope, so tell us: Are you doing hijacking and don't
want interference?

Ø  It is in the scope of the legislators who choose to regulate these
things…

It is not in the scope of these legislators and it is not a choice of them.
The civil society victim of this debacle that you all have created is who
pressures governments to intervene in what should be free and
self-regulated.

Ø  Since ICANN’s only role in numbers… …I’m not sure what role you think
they could have in addressing numbers hijacking, but please do explicate.

I explain. In the discussions I refuse to individualize the crimes
committed by ISP customers whether they are real or invented customers.
Individualization is done in denunciations, which are always copied to all
involved providers (network and hosting), registrars (DNS), ICANN, media
and governmental organizations or not.

And I explain who ICANN is: There is no point in copying the complaint to
ICANN. They have a system that I call scare-people. You have to fill out a
long form on their website. Which of course scare anyone who wishes to make
a complaint. They are experts at disrespecting the victims of their little
friends. Whatever the complaint, ICANN requires the Registrar to be
informed. No matter how much evidence you include in the complaint, the
answer will always be the same: "We did not find any irregularities in the
domain informed." Are not they cute? They should be in jail.

Ø  I’m pretty sure this is out of scope for the Pope unless you want… I
suppose the Queen of England could serve as your advocate in parliament if
you…

I quoted the pope and the queen to ridicule the absurdity of the lack of
responsibility that you all want. Making a joke describing what it would be
like with the pope or the queen proves that you are just trying to diverge
to omit yourself in regard to the lack of responsibility for impunity.

Ø  I have never said that no-one is responsible. I have said that... The
one thing that ALL of those people who are responsible have in common… THEY
RUN ROUTERS.

Bla, bla, bla, bla... I'll tell you what all those responsible have in
common: AUP and ToS alike. All these proposals and discussions are
absolutely useless. Even if a proposal becomes a policy, it will not change
anything. You know this and you discuss proposals and policies just to not
address the core problem: an absolute lack of ethics. If ISPs and
Registrars behaved like stated in their AUPs and ToSs, and the RIRs and
ICANN required their customers to act accordingly, they would not be on the
crime pages of the newspapers. But they would be far less rich. So... out
of the scope!

Ø  I’m guessing this is some reference to Pokemon (based on brief Google
search). Afraid I’m not familiar.

If you want to connect Larry Ash from Mountain West Telephone with
Pokemon... Be my guest.

You're right. Corrupt Internet is a dumb expression. People can be corrupt.
I overestimated the 80,000 ASs. They make the Internet work but they are
not the Internet. At the IGF-UN I have expressed my concern and the danger
of imagining *IoT* and *AI* being manipulated by these ISPs. May the gods
help us!

Mr. Router, will the "768K day" happen? On May 1st, 700 billion spam were
trafficked. What is the new goal? A trillion a day? You are experts at
pissing people off, are not you? What a sick profession! After an
exhausting day irritating people, can you sleep at night? Sociopaths can do
it!

That's it Mr. John Curran. Feel free to do what you have to do because you
no longer have any use for me. But know that everything we wrote was not
restricted to ARIN. It was shared with the world. Thank you very much.

Marilson



Em qua, 8 de mai de 2019 às 16:18, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> escreveu:

>
>
> On May 7, 2019, at 7:46 PM, Marilson Mapa <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Owen, I almost cried with the paradise you described.
> Ø  people of good will and good character
>
> Ø  like a small town where everyone could leave their doors unlocked
>
> In the 20th century? Steve Jobs described a very different environment. I
> was there and I was already an adult, and this paradise only existed in the
> hippy communities sprinkled with marijuana.
>
> Actually, I visited such a place in 2005 as an adult.  The place was
> Naithon, Phuket, Thailand.
>
> It is not a hippy community at all and I did not encounter any Marijuana
> there. I’m sure it was probably available (it was illegal there at the
> time, but many laws in Thailand have rather limited enforcement and for the
> most part as long as you’re not harming anyone or making a fool of yourself
> in public it’s live and let live), but I wasn’t looking for it. I didn’t
> encounter the aroma of anyone else imbibing.
>
> Besides, I did not mention the creation of the Internet. Read again: “But
> the BGP has at its origin a critical design flaw.”
>
> BGP was created during a time in the internet before the WWW and before
> all of the problems it brought to the internet.
>
> In fact, BGP version 4 (the still current version) existed during this
> early time in the internet. I was there. I was an adult. I was running
> routers. You, by your own admission, were not running routers at the time,
> so perhaps accept that I know somewhat more about this history than you do.
>
> 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.
>
>
> Ø  perhaps you would have a legitimate accusation
>
> One? I have 1.3 GB. You insist on disqualifying me for not having the
> technical competence to discuss these problems. Not being the professional
> that you are, is a reason for pride. If not, let's see: I am an architect
> and urban planner. I have been trained to provide comfort, security and
> well-being to people in their homes, workplaces, amusements and in multiple
> activities inside and outside the buildings. While your profession is
> marked by providing irritation and malaise to billions of people.))
>
> No, you have 1.3GB of accusations against bad actors on the internet 8+
> years after BGP4 was created. I am talking about your accusations against
> the designers of BGP4.
>
> Ø  I’m telling you that I don’t have good answers to those questions and
> that I believe the RIRs to be the wrong tool for the job.
> Ø  You are again mistaken.
>
> Ø  Yesterday was “out of scope” and today I believe it is still out of
> scope.
>
> It is outside the scope of the Registrars, it is outside the scope of the
> RIRs, it is outside the scope of ICANN ... It is out of the scope of all.
> Should we appeal to Pope Francis? Maybe to the Queen of England…
>
> It is in the scope of those who run routers… Find them in ISP fora and at
> the IETF.
>
> It is in the scope of the legislators who choose to regulate these things…
> Find them in whatever governmental structures apply in your locale.
>
> You say “registrars” and “RIRs” as if they are separate groups. The RIRs
> are the registrars/registries for numbers. If you’re talking about DNS
> registrars, then I’m not sure how they entered this thread as we’re talking
> about the hijacking of numbers and names do not enter the discussion.
>
> Since ICANN’s only role in numbers is to maintain the central free pool
> and pass large blocks of numbers to the RIRs upon validated request, I’m
> not sure what role you think they could have in addressing numbers
> hijacking, but please do explicate.
>
> I’m pretty sure this is out of scope for the Pope unless you want to pass
> laws governing the hijacking of numbers within the country known as the
> Vatican or set policies that Catholic Churches will not hijack other
> entity’s routes. (To the best of my knowledge, the Catholic Church for all
> it’s many foibles is not a significant source of BGP hijacking, someone
> please correct me if I’m wrong about that).
>
> I suppose the Queen of England could serve as your advocate in parliament
> if you convince her, but I suspect you’re more likely to have greater
> success in approaching MPs directly. Given your writing style, I suspect
> you should start with the house of commons, but you’re certainly free to
> contact the lords if that is your preference.
>
> This situation you created is very comfortable, is not it? When no one is
> responsible we have no one's land. Not the paradise you created in the 20th
> century. But your old wild far west of the 18th and 19th centuries. The
> insistence on not demanding ethical behavior from the community and respect
> for their AUPs and ToSs takes them to the police pages of the newspapers.
> The Economist coined the acronym BAADD for tech giants as a threat to
> democracy. I coined the acronym GGM21C - the Great Global Mafia of the 21st
> Century. The billionaires fines are being applied and the community insists
> on doing nothing.
>
> Actually, the situation I have described (not created) is not comfortable
> at all. If I can find a way that ARIN is responsible and can control the
> situation, then I can find a way that the problem can be solved relatively
> easily. Unfortunately, since I live in reality, I must describe the
> situation as it actually exists on the ground and not how we might imagine
> we wish it had been created.
>
> I have never said that no-one is responsible. I have said that those who
> run routers are responsible. Those who propoagate illegitimate
> advertisements are responsible. Those who originate illegitimate
> advertisements are responsible. Those who accept illegitimate
> advertisements are partially responsible and fully responsible if they pass
> them along to others. The one thing that ALL of those people who are
> responsible have in common… THEY RUN ROUTERS.
>
> I repeat: Mr. Ash's swamp is not on prop-266, it's on this corrupt
> internet that treats the population as beef cattle.
>
> I’m guessing this is some reference to Pokemon (based on brief Google
> search). Afraid I’m not familiar.
>
> In any case, it’s hard for me to understand what you mean by “this corrupt
> internet” since there is not really any single cohesive entity that can be
> called “the internet”. What we refer to for convenience as “the internet”
> is the very large collection of thousands (maybe even millions) of
> independently owned and operated networks that happen to use the same
> protocol and through a variety of mechanisms make it possible for packets
> from any node on any one of them to reach virtually any other node on any
> of the networks in question.
>
> Referring to “this corrupt internet” is kind of like referring to “this
> corrupt race” or “this corrupt society” or “this corrupt planet full of
> inhabitants”. It has no legitimate meaning.
>
> In any group so large, one will have a variety of actors. Whether any
> individual actor is good or bad is a value judgment made by individuals,
> laws, governments, courts, or others.
>
> Whether a society as a whole is corrupt is a much more difficult
> classification and is generally unlikely to be accurate in either direction
> due to the presence of both corrupt and non-corrupt individuals in any
> given group.
>
> Owen
>
> P.S. I don’t mind waiting two weeks for your reply… I’ll still be here.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190523/3aa78ae4/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list