[143906] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jimmy Hess)
Sun Aug 21 14:16:15 2011
In-Reply-To: <8702FADC-8760-47AD-A6B8-8534418F2179@bogus.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 13:15:40 -0500
From: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com>
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> On Aug 20, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
>> I completely agree... the real issue here is the system is flawed and RI=
PE/ARIN/APNIC etc have zero actual authority over actual routing. =A0Yet an=
other reason they aren't worth the money we flush down the toilet for them =
to do absolutely nothing.
>> --Tammy
The system is this way BY DESIGN, and any other method would concentrate p=
ower
which would be detrimental to the internet and counter to its
open/consensus driven nature.
Whenever power or authority has been concentrated or centralized on
the internet, the
altruistic objective has almost always been distorted or corrupted to
serve for-profit/commercial
interests instead of community interests.
The domain name system and ICANN is the perfect, iconical example, of
why we should never
have a single entity with ACTUAL authority over routing.
The RIRs' job is to provide unique registrations, nothing else.
And registry fees are for recovering costs necessary to provide the
service and to maintain
addressing policy.
Just like the IETF's job is to provide RFCs.
But the IETF has no authority to go around to mailservers running
certain software,
and force them to be turned off for non-compliance with the RFC.
_Enforcement_ of RIR allocations is by network operators refusing to
originate or propagate announcements by organizations unauthorized by
the registered resource holder.
So IANA/ARIN/RIPE/APNIC/etc _do_ have an effect on routing policy, it's =
just
an indirect effect that depends on the operator community recognizing the=
m
as the IP address registry.
--
-JH
