In message <5813dacd.3000...@foobar.org>, Nick Hilliard <n...@foobar.org> wrote:
>Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> Will never happen. The RiRs have been crystal clear, and also utterly >> consistant... "Not our job man! We am not the Internetz Police." > >Ron, > >Maybe you could suggest some ideas about how the RIRs can stop someone >from illegally squatting space? Oh, don't get me wrong. I never said that I either could or would suggest how to convert RiRs into The Internet Police. Nor did I suggest that such a conversion would even be either prudent or advisable. (I am not persuaded that it would be.) We have a longstanding 20 or 30 year tradition/precedent and a division of labor that -does not- allocate to RiRs any responsibility for, or authority over anything to do with what routes people announce, and I am certainly not even nearly so presumptive as to believe that I either can or should try to roll back 30 years of history and ask everyone to start all over again and build governance structures anew, from scratch. (Doing so would be both silly and the very height of arrogance on my part.) I nontheless feel free to note, and to bemoan, the current utter lack of -any- authority which routinely notices apparent routing funny business and/or which works, on a routine basis, to try to put a stop to it all. I do not suggest that RiRs should be "minding the store" with respect to route announcements. I do think it would be helpful if -somebody- were doing so. My own occasional and srictly ad hoc efforts have only succeded in convincing me of how extensive the problem is, and how dire a need there is for a more rigorous solution. Regards, rfg
