<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
On 12 Jul 2019, at 12:00 PM, David Farmer <<a href="mailto:farmer@umn.edu" class="">farmer@umn.edu</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">...<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" class="">
To that end, looking at Route Hijacking more generically, what is it? It is announcing a route for IP addresses registered to someone else or using an ASN registered to someone else to announce routes, without the permission of the registrant. Or more simply,
it is one of many ways of disrupting or interfering with a third party's use of services provided to them by ARIN. Where the service provided by ARIN, in this case, is the unique registration of IP addresses and ASNs, which is effectively the primary mission
of and service provided by ARIN and the other RIRs.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
<div class="">David - </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>The problem with that reasoning is that the registrants "use of ARIN’s registration services" generally continues just fine… i.e. they can receive additional resources, update their
number resources entries, etc. Thus, ARIN would likely face challenges in attempting to assert violation of the Prohibited Conduct clause on such a basis. </div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span></div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>If the community really wishes that those participating in the ARIN registry commit to specific routing behavior, then such an obligation should be made quite explicit in the RSA.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>For example – "Address Holder agrees to only announce routing for its own address blocks, or those address blocks for which it has obtained permission of the registrant as listed in
the Internet Number Registry System.” </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>It is unclear if such an obligation should exist, and I would advise the community to very carefully consider the implications that would result. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>(If there were a consultation that showed significant support, then the Board of Trustees could consider recommending such an RSA change – note that the latest version of the RSA provides
that ARIN may only modify the RSA in response to a specific change in the law, or after ratification by Member vote… i.e. adding such an obligation would require recommendation of the Board followed by an affirmative ballot of the ARIN Membership.) </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thanks,</div>
<div class="">/John</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">John Curran</div>
<div class="">President and CEO</div>
<div class="">American Registry for Internet Numbers</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</body>
</html>