nanog mailing list archives
Re: About inetnum "ownership"
From: "Bob Evans" <bob () FiberInternetCenter com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:55:25 -0800
As far as I know there is no requirement to announce your assigned or legacy owned prefixes to the world. You have the right to announce them. I don't think you can legally stop others from announcing your path to them. Once you publicly announce something, it's out there. Oh well, maybe I didn't get the original question. I thought the discussion was about a network's right to prevent others in the world from announcing/propagating a route to that network's prefixes. Seemed to be a legal question and the field analogy someone put forth seemed to apply well. I can't take credit for that as I simply tuned it and showed how it fit in a historical way. I think a lawyer would probably make this analogy in a court. Thank You Bob Evans CTO
Interesting demonstration of why retreat to analogies does not help in a discussion. A question: If you stop announcing your routes, where will the world get them from? -- sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal)
Current thread:
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Owen DeLong (Mar 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Owen DeLong (Mar 01)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" William Herrin (Mar 01)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Karl Auer (Mar 01)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Jonas Bjork (Mar 01)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" William Herrin (Mar 02)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" William Herrin (Mar 02)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Constantine A. Murenin (Mar 02)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" William Herrin (Mar 01)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Bob Evans (Mar 02)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Larry Sheldon (Mar 02)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Bob Evans (Mar 02)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Owen DeLong (Mar 03)
- Re: About inetnum "ownership" Owen DeLong (Mar 03)