Re: [sig-policy] Forwarded reply from Gordon Bader

[Philip Smith <pfs@cisco.com>]

Hi Gordon,

Just some more (hopefully helpful) comments for expanding your discussion, 
especially when the proposal is presented at APNIC 18...

At 06:27 16/08/2004 -0700, GB wrote:

> If a carrier is routing to dark address space, and continues to ignore 
> requests not to do so, then we as a community should be able to disconnect 
> our routing to them.  If we all disconnect to them, then that particular 
> carrier will have nothing to carry.  Essentially out of business.  That 
> would hopefully force them back in to compliance.  That is the basic 
> assumption behind the proposal.
It might be useful to put some suggestion of time limits into this. I know 
this might be considered an implementation detail, but I think that some 
sort of initial timescale discussion will need to be had. How much time 
would we give an RIR member to comply? And if someone has their allocation 
or assignment removed, how long for the other RIR members to comply?

What about a notification mechanism? At the moment, when IANA announces to 
virtually every operations list in existence that they have allocated a new 
/8 block to an RIR, it still seems to takes months for some ISPs to update 
their filters to permit announcements from this new address block into 
their network. Given how hard this seems to be at the moment, I'm wondering 
how hard it is going to be with trying to enforce compliance with blocking 
newly created dark address space?

philip
--