Bill,<div><br></div><div>I see what you're saying here but the reality for me was that for close to a year a very large ISP didn't pay attention to ARIN's allocation of parts of <a href="http://24.0.0.0/8">24.0.0.0/8</a>. They were big and I was little and so they won at least for a time. Their customers weren't complaining and so they had no need to accept my more specific route. Those of us with parts of <a href="http://24.0.0.0/8">24.0.0.0/8</a> complained but since none of us were paying that large ISP we were ignored. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I could see this happening again if for example the ARIN community decided on a policy that caused the global routing table to explode. Then ISPs would most likely filter to keep their routers from crashing and those super specific blocks wouldn't be routable. </div>
<div> </div><div>ARIN has no control over filtering/routing policies. At a recent NANOG there was a panel where ISPs in no uncertain terms told the community that they do not want ARIN policies to include anything about routing policy. I believe at this point that most of the RIRs have removed routing criteria from their IPv6 policies for that very reason. </div>
<div><br></div><div>----Cathy <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 3:37 PM, William Herrin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Barbara Roseman<br>
<<a href="mailto:barbara.roseman@icann.org">barbara.roseman@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> I think there's a subtle but important distinction<br>
> that's being lost, and that Cathy and Marla tried to clarify.<br>
<br>
</div>Hi Barbara,<br>
<br>
If I understood the distinction that Cathy and Marla drew, the point<br>
they're making is that nowhere does ARIN say what routes an ISP has to<br>
carry. ARIN doesn't even say what routes an ISP ought to carry. Nor is<br>
there any other legal obligation which compels ISPs to carry any<br>
particular routes for addresses ARIN allocates. Like Verizon has done<br>
with IPv6 /48's, ISPs are welcome to disregard any routes they don't<br>
like for any reason at all. That they rarely exercise that choice<br>
means nothing more sinister than that routing the address ARIN<br>
allocates is good for business.<br>
<br>
Do you feel that's a reasonable re-statement of what they said? I'd<br>
hate to be obtuse about it, so if I'm missing the their point please<br>
help me understand.<br>
<br>
<br>
I think I understand the claim, but I dispute it.<br>
<br>
Cause and effect is no less potent for being indirect. The<br>
practicality of altering BGP routing activity based on a second feed<br>
of assignments matched to assignment classes is doubtful. Even if it<br>
could be done from a technical perspective, ARIN doesn't publish the<br>
criteria by which each registrant qualified for their addresses, so<br>
such a feed has no source for its content.<br>
<br>
Realistically, functionally, technically, the tools I as an operator<br>
have for implementing routing policy can only paint with a broad<br>
brush. Discard small announcements in this /8. Depreference that one.<br>
Unless ARIN classifies registrants in a manner consistent with those<br>
tools, my choices for routing policy devolve to two basic options:<br>
accept routes announcing ARIN IP addresses or don't.<br>
<br>
In other words, ARIN sets the routing policy for North America. Not<br>
explicitly, cleanly and openly, but haphazardly, indirectly and<br>
silently.<br>
<br>
The unspoken and unintentional yet cumulative net effect of ARIN's<br>
allocation practices make ISPs a mob-style offer they can't refuse:<br>
carry all of the addresses we approve or carry none of them and lose<br>
your business.<br>
<br>
At this point we're stuck with that for IPv4. The addresses are<br>
already deployed. With some mild adjustments to our allocation<br>
practices, we don't have to be stuck with that effect for IPv6.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
Regards,<br>
Bill Herrin<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
William D. Herrin ................ <a href="mailto:herrin@dirtside.com">herrin@dirtside.com</a> <a href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</a><br>
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <<a href="http://bill.herrin.us/" target="_blank">http://bill.herrin.us/</a>><br>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PPML<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
<a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>