"Defensive" BGP hijacking?
morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Tue Sep 20 03:58:32 UTC 2016
(caution! I don't really think arin is evil!)
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:16 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 4:59 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com>
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Bryan Fields <Bryan at bryanfields.net>
> >> On 9/14/16 3:09 AM, Scott Weeks wrote:
> >>> Yes, RPKI. That's what I was waiting for. Now we can get to
> >>> a real discussion
> >> ...
> >> sure as heck not going to sign a legally binding contract saying they
> do :)
> > don't have to... see press.
> Chris -
> To be clear, he would still end up bound to an agreement which provides
> that they
> indemnify the RIR regarding their RPKI usage (which was the complaint
> in the NANOG community regarding ARIN’s RPKI terms and conditions) -
maybe, but his point was that the evil (evile?) arin would not be putting
their clutches on his ip-address-spaces... Sure he's trading ARIN for RIPE
here, but I diidn't think the RPA bit was his concern as much as the LRSA
and 'now that you agree these are ip blocks are subject to the legacy
registry services agreement, we (arin - with twisty mustasche) might decide
to wrest them away from you!!!<muahahahahaa!>'
I may have misinterpreted his issue, or not completed his unwritten thought
about the RPA.
> "The Member shall indemnify the RIPE NCC against any and all third party
> claims filed against the RIPE NCC in relation to the Member’s use of the
> RIPE NCC Certification Service or the Certificate.”
> John Curran
> President and CEO
More information about the NANOG