nanog mailing list archives
Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap
From: David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:26:08 -1000
Jimmy, On Aug 21, 2011, at 8:15 AM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
The system is this way BY DESIGN, and any other method would concentrate power which would be detrimental to the internet and counter to its open/consensus driven nature.
See recent discussions in RIPEland regarding BGPSEC+RPKI regarding policy 2008-08.
The RIRs' job is to provide unique registrations, nothing else. And registry fees are for recovering costs necessary to provide the service and to maintain addressing policy.
Googling "<RIR> budget 2011" gives (all in US$, using today's Euro and Aus$ conversion rates): AfriNIC: 2011 Expenses: $2,832,614 (http://www.afrinic.org/corporate/Budget2011.pdf) APNIC: 2011 Expenses: $14,815,906 (http://meetings.apnic.net/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/31478/treasurers_report.pdf) ARIN: 2011 Expenses: $16,412,160 (https://www.arin.net/about_us/corp_docs/budget.html) RIPE: 2011 Expenses: $26,313,894 (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-507, using today's exchange rate) Can't seem to find a 2011 (or anything more recent than 2005) budget for LACNIC. BTW, since you made passing reference to them and just FYA: ICANN: Expenses: $61,164,000 (http://www.icann.org/en/financials/adopted-opplan-budget-fy12-09aug11-en.pdf) So if LACNIC's budget is more than $790K, the RIRs combined budget for "providing unique registrations, nothing else" for IP addresses will be more than ICANN's budget for coordinating all unique Internet identifiers including addresses, IETF protocol parameters, and domains (and "promoting competition" in the latter) and dealing with a much larger community (at least as measured by meeting attendance).
_Enforcement_ of RIR allocations is by network operators refusing to originate or propagate announcements by organizations unauthorized by the registered resource holder.
Very true. Of course, defining "registered resource holder" and finding that information will likely get a bit more complicated in the future... Regards, -drc
Current thread:
- Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Denis Spirin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Arturo Servin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Denis Spirin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Arturo Servin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Denis Spirin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Arturo Servin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap David Conrad (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Tammy A. Wisdom (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Joel Jaeggli (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Jimmy Hess (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap David Conrad (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Denis Spirin (Aug 20)
- RE: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Nathan Eisenberg (Aug 21)
- resolving prefix hijacks (was Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap) Ken Chase (Aug 21)
- Re: resolving prefix hijacks (was Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap) Jon Lewis (Aug 21)
- Re: resolving prefix hijacks (was Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap) Randy Bush (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Arturo Servin (Aug 20)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Arturo Servin (Aug 21)
- Message not available
- Fwd: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Denis Spirin (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Erik Bais (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap chip (Aug 21)
- RE: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Erik Bais (Aug 21)
- Re: Prefix hijacking by Michael Lindsay via Internap Denis Spirin (Aug 21)