[address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tom Vest
tvest at pch.net
Fri Jun 13 13:44:23 CEST 2008
On Jun 13, 2008, at 7:18 AM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote: > >> Even though this will give the NCC a bit more work to do, I >> do support this proposal. One of the main reasons being that >> the allocations will remain to be properly registered and are >> thus accountable. > > I disagree that this will make anyone more accountable. As long as > addresses are in use on the Internet, tools such as traceroute make it > possible to identify the source of traffic, and the organization which > is actually using an IP address block. In fact, I am currently sorting > out an issue with SAIX in South Africa announcing, and passing traffic > for someone who is using one of our IP address ranges. The fact that > our > address range is correctly registered in ARIN's database did not stop > someone from using it on the Internet, and the fact that the user is > not > in any RIR database, does not prevent us from solving the problem. > > In fact, I suspect that most companies don't even care to make the > actual user of an IP address range accountable. If the next link in > the > chain is accountable, i.e. the upstream of this non-accountable IP > address user, then the problem can be quickly resolved. > > Therefore, accountability is not necessary in all cases. At the same > time, RIPE can only affect accountability very indirectly with correct > database entries. The history of the RIPE database and other RIR > databases shows that they don't have a big impact on accountability > and > they also do not have a great track record for accuracy. I just do not > see a connection between greater (or lesser) accountability, and a > more > accurate (or less accurate) RIPE database. > > --Michael Dillon Hi Michael, Does that suggest that accountability and accuracy would be improved if everyone had the same (presumably more accountable) integrated upstream provider / database maintainer? TV
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]