[149325] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [#135346] Unauthorized BGP Announcements (follow up to Hijacked
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Wed Feb 1 15:10:58 2012
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <596B74B410EE6B4CA8A30C3AF1A155EA09C9F5BD@RWC-MBX1.corp.seven.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 12:10:00 -0800
To: George Bonser <gbonser@seven.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 1, 2012, at 10:16 AM, George Bonser wrote:
>>>> "We have a contractual relationship with our customer to announce
>>>> that space. We have neither a contractual relationship (in this
>>>> context) with the RIR nor the RIR's customer. The RIR and/or the =
RIR's
>>>> customer should resolve this issue with our customer."
>>> Contracts are generally not a valid reason to be breaking laws.
>> Which law?
> Let's say I had a business in space in a building I was leasing at 100 =
Main Street, Podunk, USA.
I'm told IP addresses aren't property.
> Or let's say I operated a TV station
As I understand it, radio frequencies are subject to international =
treaties. In signatory countries, laws can be enacted to enforce the =
provisions of those treaties. As far as I'm aware, there are no treaties =
dealing with IP addresses or how those addresses are announced.
> It might be civil rather than criminal but the rightful owner of the =
resource would have a good case.
"Owner"?
Long ago, Mitch Kapor (I believe) described the Internet addressing =
system working because of the "Tinkerbelle Effect", that is (to =
paraphase), it works because everyone believes it is in their best =
interests that it works. However, as we've seen when push comes to =
shove, the Tinkerbelle Effect can break down. Thus, you get perfectly =
justifiable arguments for stuff like RPKI/BGPSEC and the equivalent of =
the Protocol Police. This does have the potential for unintended (and =
intended) consequences...
Regards,
-drc
