On 2019-04-26 13:54, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote: > Hi Owen, > > So, you believe that if an ARIN member is repeatedly misusing the resources > from another member, is just fine and the ARIN membership which rules are the > policies, should not care about this behavior and members should not get > their exclusive rights to use their allocated resources protected by policies?
Whether or not something is right or wrong is orthogonal to the question of whether ARIN membership status should be used to enforce that thing. Is it the intent of this proposal to exempt legacy holders from commonly-accepted BGP routing norms? Clearly not, but by placing the onus of enforcement on ARIN, that's the effect that it has. A related and very basic problem is that it's not clear where in NRPM (or *if* in NRPM) the policy text belongs. While I am supportive of the idea of preventing BGP hijacks, I am strongly opposed to placing that under ARIN's purview. And from a practical perspective, I don't want the RIRs to have to go through expense and possible legal exposure of having to adjudicate cases of alleged hijacking. The best the RIRs can do is to encourage and create incentives for RPKI and other techniques that are actually reasonable for a *registry* to support. Let's put our energy into that. Opposed as written. michael _______________________________________________ ARIN-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: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
