Another day, another illicit SQUAT - WebNX (AS18450) 188.8.131.52/24
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Fri Oct 28 23:53:29 UTC 2016
In message <5813DACD.3000309 at foobar.org>,
Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
>Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> Will never happen. The RiRs have been crystal clear, and also utterly
>> consistant... "Not our job man! We am not the Internetz Police."
>Maybe you could suggest some ideas about how the RIRs can stop someone
>from illegally squatting space?
Oh, don't get me wrong. I never said that I either could or would
suggest how to convert RiRs into The Internet Police. Nor did I suggest
that such a conversion would even be either prudent or advisable.
(I am not persuaded that it would be.)
We have a longstanding 20 or 30 year tradition/precedent and a division
of labor that -does not- allocate to RiRs any responsibility for, or
authority over anything to do with what routes people announce, and I
am certainly not even nearly so presumptive as to believe that I either
can or should try to roll back 30 years of history and ask everyone to
start all over again and build governance structures anew, from scratch.
(Doing so would be both silly and the very height of arrogance on my part.)
I nontheless feel free to note, and to bemoan, the current utter lack
of -any- authority which routinely notices apparent routing funny business
and/or which works, on a routine basis, to try to put a stop to it all.
I do not suggest that RiRs should be "minding the store" with respect to
route announcements. I do think it would be helpful if -somebody- were
doing so. My own occasional and srictly ad hoc efforts have only succeded
in convincing me of how extensive the problem is, and how dire a need there
is for a more rigorous solution.
More information about the NANOG