I'm the primary shepherd for this Draft;
The author is Heather Schiller, and I'm only saying that because I'm
going to reference you to her comments at the mic at the last NANOG.
The research that prompted the proposal was presented at the last NANOG
in Atlanta and is at the following link;
https://www.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2289
Heather's comments begins at about time stamp 17:10 or so on the video
of the NANOG presentation, and there are a couple other comments as well.
Additionally, the reference for the published paper for the research in
question is;
http://www.merit.edu/research/pdf/2013/ipv6_darknet_paper_r6098.pdf
Also related is; ACSP SUGGESTION 2014.3: PUBLISH INFORMATION AND
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR EXPERIMENTAL ALLOCATIONS
https://www.arin.net/participate/acsp/suggestions/2014-3.html
[Shepherd hat - OFF]
While I do not have a problem with this research and I don't think we
should restrict future such activities, I believe this is something the
community should discuss in detail and try to come to consensus on, one
way or the other.
Also, while I disagree with the proposed policy text, what is proposed
is not without precedent. As discussed in the NANOG presentation, RIPE
initially gave permission for a covering prefix for its whole /12 and
then it was modified to a covering prefixes of a /14 plus a /13,
excluding the space where most allocations were. This significantly
reduced the amount of traffic for RIPE region and they were excluded
from the analysis.
Hope that helps.
On 3/26/14, 21:55 , David Huberman wrote:
Hi PPML,
Can someone show me where in the mailing list archives this policy was actively
discussed on PPML? I can't find it.
Alternatively, can the policy author or someone who strongly supports this
policy please either post to the list or email me privately and clue me in? I
issued and managed almost every experimental assignment for almost 10 years
from 2003 to 2013, and I am lost as to what this policy is saying. I would
like to be educated so I can support, or not support, the efforts that have
been made here.
Thank you!
/david
David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of ARIN
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy
On 20 March 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted
"ARIN-prop-202 Anti-hijack Policy" as a Draft Policy.
Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12 is below and can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2014_12.html
You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft Policy
2014-12 on the Public Policy Mailing List.
The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of this
draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number Resource Policy as
stated in the PDP. Specifically, these principles are:
* Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
* Technically Sound
* Supported by the Community
The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
Regards,
Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
## * ##
Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12
Anti-hijack Policy
Date: 25 March 2014
Problem Statement:
ARIN should not give research organizations permission to hijack prefixes that
have already been allocated. Research organizations announcing lit aggregates
may receive sensitive production traffic belonging to live networks during
periods of instability.
Section 11.7 describes more than allocation size therefore updating the section
heading to something more accurate is appropriate.
Policy statement:
Modify the section 11.7 heading to be more accurate. Modify the first sentence
to prohibit overlapping assignments. Add text at the end to define how research
allocations should be designated and prohibit LOA's without allocations.
11.7 Resource Allocation Guidelines
The Numbering Resources requested come from the global Internet Resource space,
do not overlap previously assigned space, and are not from private or other
non-routable Internet Resource space. The allocation size should be consistent
with the existing ARIN minimum allocation sizes, unless small allocations are
intended to be explicitly part of the experiment. If an organization requires
more resource than stipulated by the minimum allocation sizes in force at the
time of their request, their experimental documentation should have clearly
described and justified why this is required.
All research allocations must be registered publicly in whois. Each research
allocation will be designated as a research allocation with a comment
indicating when the allocation will end. ARIN will not issue a Letter of
Authority (LOA) to route a research prefix unless the allocation is properly
registered in whois.
Comments:
a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate b. Anything else:
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: [email protected]
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
