cats are nice colin
Sent from my iPhone > On 19 Jan 2016, at 15:12, "Michael O'Connor" <m...@es.net> wrote: > > Why do we believe network administrators can advocate perfectly for > customer access? > I couldn't control my own children's access without making us all > miserable. > > Nation state access control in a free country at the network layer is bound > to fail, way too many cats to herd. > > > >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 2:31 PM, <b...@theworld.com> wrote: >> >> >> On January 18, 2016 at 00:21 valdis.kletni...@vt.edu ( >> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu) wrote: >>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:39:52 -0500, b...@theworld.com said: >>>> How about if backed by an agreement with the 5 RIRs stating no new >>>> resource allocations or transfers etc unless a contract is signed and >>>> enforced? Or similar. >>> >>> Then they'd just resort to hijacking address space. >>> >>> Oh wait, they already do that and get away with it.... >> >> I think we're talking about two different problems, both valid. >> >> One is legitimate operators who probably mostly want to do the right >> thing but are negligent, disagree (perhaps with many one this list) on >> what is an actionable problem, etc. >> >> The other are those actors prone to criminality. >> >> I was addressing the first problem though I'd assert that progress on >> the first problem would likely yield progress on the second, or >> cooperation anyhow. >> >>> >>> (And a threat of withholding IP address space from long-haul providers >> isn't as >>> credible - they have much less need for publicly routed IP addresses >> than >>> either eyeball farms or content farms, so you'll have to find some >> other way to >>> motivate them to not accept a hijacked route announcement...) >>> >> >> No man is an island entire of himself -- John Donne. >> >> First one has to agree to the concept of creating a network based on >> contractual agreements. >> >> I gave some examples of how to encourage actors to enter into those >> contracts, my list wasn't intended to be exhaustive, it was intended >> to be an existence proof, some pressure points exist and are easy to >> understand even if not complete. >> >> Besides, why make the perfect the enemy of the good? If many, perhaps >> not all (or not at first), agreed to a common set of contractual >> obligations that would be progress, no? >> >> Is there even a document which describes what a "hijacked" net block >> is and why it is bad? Obvious? No, it is not obvious. The best one can >> say is there exist obvious cases. >> >> -- >> -Barry Shein >> >> Software Tool & Die | b...@theworld.com | >> http://www.TheWorld.com >> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD >> The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo* >> > > > > -- > Michael O'Connor > ESnet Network Engineering > m...@es.net > 631 344-7410
