<snip>
> If Organization A has an agreement/letter of authority to announce 
> addresses that has been allocated/assigned to Organization B, and 
> Organization B wants to replace Organization A with Organization C, 
> but there was some onerous termination clause with Organization A that 
> has not been met so Organization A continues to announce Organization B’s 
> address space, is that BGP Hijacking? To me, this sounds like a contract 
> dispute that depends on the contents of the private contract between A and B.

Correct. ARIN has allocated addresses to organization B. In that case, org A 
and org B have to sort out their differences in the legal system.
However, we have to be careful with similarities with your next point just 
below. What are the differences between them ? the lack of a contract or 
agreement, or the fact that ARIN does not have access to it ? or some other 
factor ?

> If an organization A does not have a an agreement/letter of authority 
> to announce addresses that has been allocated/assigned to Organization 
> B but does so anyhow and allows that announcement to propagate to the general 
> internet, is that BGP Hijacking? Seems highly likely to be BGP Hijacking.

I agree. Same as above though, we need a very clear definition of what 
constitutes not having an agreement or a contract before ARIN can make the 
determination that it is indeed hijacking.

> From the outside, how do we know that an agreement/letter of authority does 
> not exist, is invalid, or is forged?

This is where we have to be very complete, very comprehensive, and as much 
exhaustive as possible.
</snip>

Hello list,

The important issues above would be part of a comprehensive lease policy, and 
violations of that policy thus subject to ARIN 's rebuke. That at least would 
provide what some of the policymakers intend while acknowledging ARIN's 
limitations of rebuke to ARIN members. It would provide clear policy language 
that make hijacks a violation of policy while restraining ARIN's response to 
those with whom it has a contract.

We can create a lease policy and within it define comprehensively the answers 
to the questions above, namely what is a valid agreement and what  is a valid 
LOA. I believe that in a market environment, the absence of a clear policy 
regarding leasing is a mistake.

Many addresses are "changing hands" via leasing, and we face the danger that 
Whois will become less relevant as a result.
If we had a lease policy, we could require registration of the leased blocks 
via SWIP or some other method. We could define the requirements for a valid 
LoA, terms for dispute resolution, etc. In other words the issues above, 
onerous termination requirements, contents of a valid lease contract, and 
definition of a valid Letter of Authority would all be addressed in a 
comprehensive lease policy.  These definitions would help innocent upstream 
providers as well, to know they can deploy policy-compliant agreements/LoAs as 
a defense to any charges of complicity.

I see a lease policy as a way to address the desires of the community to 
express its anti-hijacking sentiment and to deal with the absence of policy on 
a growing address distribution mechanism, while staying within ARIN scope.  If 
similar lease policies were implemented at other RIRs, where they would also be 
within scope (I believe), then we would be going a long way to achieve the 
goals of the policy authors, especially if it developed into an inter-regional 
lease policy. Any hijack would then be a lease policy violation and any 
complicit members of any RIR would be subject to penalty.

Regards,
Mike

PS We are seeing more leasing, especially as lessors can function effectively 
as quasi-RIRs, except with extra services. For example, if I want temporary 
addresses, if I want disparate addresses, if I want specifically pre-geolocated 
addresses, if I want a smaller subnet than a /24, I can find that more easily 
from a lessor than from an RIR in many cases. 

 

_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to