About inetnum "ownership"

Larry Sheldon larrysheldon at cox.net
Thu Mar 3 00:17:13 UTC 2016

On 3/2/2016 08:05, Bob Evans wrote:
> The numbers (IP addresses) are not the field. The servers are the field.
> The numbers are the street addresses of the server. Domain names would be
> a nick name for the numbers, like PaddingHouse.com is at The
> BGP table is a road map.
> That's why it was once called the Super Information Highway, remember?
> You can sell street/road maps to the stars, and the stars don't have to
> let you in.
> Thank You
> Bob Evans
>> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 00:44 -0500, William Herrin wrote:
>>> Do I have the legal right to exclude others from announcing my block
>>> of IP addresses to the public Internet routing tables? It's not well
>>> tested in court but the odds are exceptionally strong that I do.
>> If I own some property - say a field - the location of that field is
>> with certain rare exceptions public information. I as the owner cannot
>> enforce a requirement on you to NOT tell people where my field is. I
>> can't demand that you NOT build roads past it, or that you NOT put up
>> signs saying how to get to my field, or even that you NOT tell people
>> who owns the field. I have the right to exclusive use of the property,
>> but I have no rights to information about the property, nor any
>> property rights outside the boundary of the property.
>> 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.
>> Has this sort of thing been tested in the courts at all? In any
>> jurisdiction?
>>> Indeed, the whole point of registration is to facilitate
>>> determination
>>> of -who- has the exclusive right over -which- blocks of addresses.
>> The problem is what rights we are talking about. I would say that
>> practically speaking the only real right here is the right to configure
>> an address on an interface. But anyone else can send packets to an
>> address, or advertise to others the direction of travel towards that
>> network. Malicious activity excluded of course - DoS attacks and so on,
>> but I think the issues there are different. Also, contractually
>> regulated relationships are different - if I connect something up to
>> ISPX and have a contract with ISPX to NOT advertise the route to me,
>> then ISPX is constrained.
>> Regards, K.
>> --
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)
>> http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
>> http://twitter.com/kauer389
>> GPG fingerprint: E00D 64ED 9C6A 8605 21E0 0ED0 EE64 2BEE CBCB C38B
>> Old fingerprint: 3C41 82BE A9E7 99A1 B931 5AE7 7638 0147 2C3C 2AC4

Interesting demonstration of why retreat to analogies does not help in a 

A question:  If you stop announcing your routes, where will the world 
get them from?

sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal)

More information about the NANOG mailing list