About inetnum "ownership"

Wed Mar 2 11:46:09 UTC 2016

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
> Testing in court the idea that you may not advertise my routes would be
> a fascinating exercise. If you falsely advertised them it would be a
> different matter.

Hi Karl,

I'm having trouble seeing the nit you're picking. I can't compel you
to announce my BGP route but if you do announce it and your
announcement is inconsistent with my own then by definition it's
false. If your announcement is consistent with my own then you're
propagating the route as intended and I have no cause for complaint.

> Has this sort of thing been tested in the courts at all? In any
> jurisdiction?

So far as I know, network operators have interceded and the false
routes have been withdrawn long before any route hijacking cases would
have gone to court.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>