44/8

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

Apparently isn't 44/8 anymore:

NetRange: 44.192.0.0 - 44.255.255.255
CIDR: 44.192.0.0/10
NetName: AT-88-Z
NetHandle: NET-44-192-0-0-1
Parent: NET44 (NET-44-0-0-0-0)
NetType: Direct Allocation
OriginAS:
Organization: Amazon Technologies Inc. (AT-88-Z)
RegDate: 2019-07-18
Updated: 2019-07-18
Ref: https://rdap.arin.net/registry/ip/44.192.0.0

  Some additional color is available at:

  https://www.ampr.org/amprnet/

  What's interesting about this is it was not an ARIN allocation,
and the ARDC folks are not the original registrant. This IANA /8 was
initially delegated to a community, not an organization.

  So, to the individuals listed in the blog, that I've excerpted
below, what do you have to say about this?

  Brian Kantor
  kc claffy
  Phil Karn
  Paul Vixie

  [I've omitted those I don't know to be NANOG familiar.]

  ARIN also appears to have a role here. Any comment, ARIN folks?

  --msa

P.S. I've been licensed as a ham since prior to the organization of
  ARDC in 1992 -- where's my check?

2

So.. this is/was a legacy allocation, right? with some 'not great'
contact/etc info...
the ARIN folk could have said: "Well.... sure! if the current folk who
control access can positively show they do AND they don't mind parting
with a /10... ok?"

This ends up with a /10 of a /8 with better registration information
and MAYBE better records keeping over time, right?
that seems like a win to the ARIN community?

3

Did a fast lookup via ARIN WHOIS:

44/8 is now 44/9 + 44.128/10

NetRange: 44.0.0.0 - 44.191.255.255
CIDR: 44.0.0.0/9, 44.128.0.0/10
NetName: AMPRNET
NetHandle: NET-44-0-0-0-1
Parent: NET44 (NET-44-0-0-0-0)
NetType: Direct Assignment
OriginAS:
Organization: Amateur Radio Digital Communications (ARDC)
RegDate: 1992-07-01
Updated: 2019-07-18
Ref: https://rdap.arin.net/registry/ip/44.0.0.0

4

A potential upside is that hamnet operators maybe have access to some RPKI services now!

5

finally they start selling it.

6

So.. this is/was a legacy allocation, right? with some 'not great'
contact/etc info...

  It's been announced by UCSD as a /8, consistently available,
with tunnel services and rDNS available on a consistent basis, for a
long time.

  The folks involved are not hard to find and never have been.

  Amusingly, they still seem to be advertising the covering
aggregate, so I guess the Cal system is going to provide transit to
Amazon? Do the Regents know about this arrangement?

the ARIN folk could have said: "Well.... sure! if the current folk who
control access can positively show they do AND they don't mind parting
with a /10... ok?"

  ... I'm not sure this would make the 44/8 allocation anything
but a bogon, or ARIN WHOIS & RPKI a reliable resource for the community.
Potentially quite the contrary.

  If I start advertising space, and can show I thusly "control"
it, can I monetize it, too? I could use "some millions."

  --msa

7

This is par for the course with ARDC. I was a TAC committee member (I
resigned in disgust just 15 min ago), and the board has failed to inform
anyone this was happening.

I discussed this prior as we could lease it, do something with it, make some
money from it, and was 100% shot down. This has always been Brian Kantor's
private little thing ever since he took over administration of it. This take
over was before ARDC existed, and ARDC was never structured to be a proper
community focused organization. I'd addressed this at TAPR meetings and NANOG
with Brian and KC before. This also over looked the huge conflict of interest
in KC being a board member of ARDC and Network Telescope getting a feed of
44/8 direct at no cost. This 44/8 announcement and UCSD routing broke
connectivity to directly connected BGP subnets for years.

My concern as an ARDC supporter an member is now no planning in the community
for this, many people assume 44/8 is going to be licensed amateurs (I have
many firewalls with permit 44/8 in them), and no accountability of what ARDC
is doing. I believe with Brian retiring from UCSD he's looking for a job and
being a board member of a well funded 501(c)3 can be a lucrative job.

Also it's 100% broken reverse DNS for all of 44/8. :golf clap:

This was theft from the community it was meant to serve.

8

OK, I'll bite....how do you mean?

--Adam

9

> So.. this is/was a legacy allocation, right? with some 'not great'
> contact/etc info...

        It's been announced by UCSD as a /8, consistently available,
with tunnel services and rDNS available on a consistent basis, for a
long time.

        The folks involved are not hard to find and never have been.

        Amusingly, they still seem to be advertising the covering
aggregate, so I guess the Cal system is going to provide transit to
Amazon? Do the Regents know about this arrangement?

who knows? probably? not really my personal concern I guess.

> the ARIN folk could have said: "Well.... sure! if the current folk who
> control access can positively show they do AND they don't mind parting
> with a /10... ok?"

        ... I'm not sure this would make the 44/8 allocation anything
but a bogon, or ARIN WHOIS & RPKI a reliable resource for the community.
Potentially quite the contrary.

I'm not sure how you're quite going in this direction...

        If I start advertising space, and can show I thusly "control"
it, can I monetize it, too? I could use "some millions."

My guess is that arin needed more than just: "can control routing for
a few bits of time".
I don't really know, but I hope they had more requirements than that :slight_smile:

I suppose though, are you more upset that the radio folk now have some
endowment (or what-have-you) or that the block is getting somewhat
chopped up?
their blog seems to indicate that there is plenty of space left, more
than they'd allocated previously (though I don't see any actioal
records).

They also state that the trust which was setup previously controled
the space and dealt with ARIN + the buyer.
it SEEMS above board... more above board than some other transactions
I've seen in the last while :frowning:

Does it serve the larger community to get the space under RSA and
potentially signed in the RPKI? or to leave it where it was before?

-chris

10

Ah, let me clarify, I didn't mean this as a tongue-in-cheek remark.

Previously no RIR "managed" the space in the conventional sense of the
word. In the case of 44.0.0.0/8, the consequences seemed to be that
none of the RIRs were in a position to provide RPKI services (ROAs)
for 44.0.0.0/8 or any more specific block within that /8.

I saw that the IANA registry was updated
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xhtml
it now shows "Administered by ARIN". My interpretation is that now a
pathway exists towards ARIN facilitating the creation of RPKI ROAs
which cover (parts of) 44.0.0.0/8.

In order to get RPKI services in context of ARIN, it appears a RSA or
LRSA needs to exist. I suspect a LRSA-style agreement was
instantiated, opening the door for RPKI services.

Kind regards,

Job

11

who knows? probably? not really my personal concern I guess.

  If they're using taxpayer supported networks to provide transit
to a private, for profit entity, we should all care.

I'm not sure how you're quite going in this direction...

  In order to sell something, you must own it...if you pop up,
claim responsibility for it, sit on it a while, and then sell it..
did you truly own it?

  If you represent a community, in theory, and sell something
without prior discussion, are there ethical concerns around that?

  There are some potential legal title questions around this,
and if ARIN is facilitating transactions with questionable history,
that is something the Internet community might be concerned about.

  Certainly, facilitating questionable transfers makes the idea
of an RIR sponsored registry that controls routing less palatable to
some individuals.

  And this is why I'd love some additional color from the
participants. Perhaps this is all explicable -- but that blog entry
did not assuage my concerns.

  --msa

12

It certainly doesn't look like it...

My understanding is that 44/8 was, very much like different pieces of the radio
spectrum, collective common property of amateur radio operators. That an
organisation was needed to operate a registry because of the nature of IP
address allocation does not amount to ownership or the right to sell anything.
This is exactly analogous to the fact that the ARRL (or RAC, or RSGB etc) does
not own and cannot sell radio spectrum allocated for amateur use.

This is not a legitimate sale. ARIN should reverse the changes in its record,
and the ARDC should give the "several million dollars" back to Amazon.

Then we can decide, openly and transparently, if, for example, some piece of
44/8 should be returned to IANA for allocation to the RIRs.

Greetings,
William Waites VE3HW

13

> who knows? probably? not really my personal concern I guess.

        If they're using taxpayer supported networks to provide transit
to a private, for profit entity, we should all care.

presumably 44/8 is shorter than the prefix AMZN is going to announce,
right? (the /10) so... either UC wll eat backscatter when/if AMZN
dorks u ptheir announcement/routing-config OR this isn't an issue.

Right?

Also, who's this 'we'.. I don't live in california... I presume UC is
getting funding from california, not virginia. (mostly)
It seems though that 44/8 was being used in some research project at
UC so... maybe this is just that still at play.
less nefarious and more 'meh, why change if we don't have to?'

> I'm not sure how you're quite going in this direction...

        In order to sell something, you must own it...if you pop up,
claim responsibility for it, sit on it a while, and then sell it..
did you truly own it?

didn't the ardc thing come into existence ~10 yrs back? though what
looks like legit paths...

        If you represent a community, in theory, and sell something
without prior discussion, are there ethical concerns around that?

it sounded like there were discussions though (based on what Mr
Fields said earlier
Perhaps those weren't as upfront as some folk want? or perhaps they
were constrained by the legal process surrounding the sale event (and
negotiations leading up to that)

        There are some potential legal title questions around this,
and if ARIN is facilitating transactions with questionable history,
that is something the Internet community might be concerned about.

sure.

        Certainly, facilitating questionable transfers makes the idea
of an RIR sponsored registry that controls routing less palatable to
some individuals.

        And this is why I'd love some additional color from the
participants. Perhaps this is all explicable -- but that blog entry
did not assuage my concerns.

perhaps they will pipe up now :slight_smile:

-chris

14

I presume they'd be more than happy to if some HAM's were to file a lawsuit against ARIN (not entirely an un-serious suggestion), but, short that, what do they care if they cooperated in stealing some otherwise-unused IPs and giving them to Amazon?

Matt

15

[Off-NANOG]

  Chris,

  Remember that state college systems receive federal education
funding; some of your dollars are in this pot, too.

  --msa

16

Sure,but... that space has been an internet telescope supporting
numerous research folk for a decade + (probably closer to 2 decades).
the amazon prefix is longer by a bit so won't really use the /8 even
if ucsd keeps the /8 up.

a bunch of this just sounds like grousing, which I guess is great...
but none of this is particularly un-predictable.
I find a bunch of the other sales far more sketchy :frowning: I also find this
prefix hilarious:

  149.1.0.0/16 (not a sale, but surely available if you track down
the owner .. who owns a winery)

anyway, it'll be fun watching what happens with 44/8 I suppose.

17

And one of the principal people in the network telescope project was KC, who
also weaseled herself onto the ARDC board without even holding an amateur
radio license. Conflict of interest here, holy carp.

Caida has been using an amateur radio resource as far back as 2001, when we
couldn't even be blessed to get 44net space for our own legitimate radio use.
I'm sure I have the message from Brian denying it in my archives.
- --
Bryan Fields

727-409-1194 - Voice
http://bryanfields.net

18

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

> Sure,but... that space has been an internet telescope supporting
> numerous research folk for a decade + (probably closer to 2 decades).
> the amazon prefix is longer by a bit so won't really use the /8 even
> if ucsd keeps the /8 up.

And one of the principal people in the network telescope project was KC, who
also weaseled herself onto the ARDC board without even holding an amateur
radio license. Conflict of interest here, holy carp.

having a large user of the space (and perhaps even a partner to the
org) be a part of the board doesn't seem like a conflict.

Caida has been using an amateur radio resource as far back as 2001, when we
couldn't even be blessed to get 44net space for our own legitimate radio use.
I'm sure I have the message from Brian denying it in my archives.

I'm sure you can pursue legal avenues if you feel this went super sideways.
you should do that.
-chris

19

Yes, actually. The legal term is “adverse possession” or more colloquially “squatters rights.”

Regards,
Bill Herrin

20

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Sure,but... that space has been an internet telescope supporting
numerous research folk for a decade + (probably closer to 2 decades).
the amazon prefix is longer by a bit so won't really use the /8 even
if ucsd keeps the /8 up.

And one of the principal people in the network telescope project was KC, who
also weaseled herself onto the ARDC board without even holding an amateur
radio license. Conflict of interest here, holy carp.

having a large user of the space (and perhaps even a partner to the
org) be a part of the board doesn't seem like a conflict.

There is some question as to the legitimacy of a large allocation of this space to
CAIDA as CAIDA has virtually nothing to do with Amateur Radio.

Putting someone without an Amateur Radio License who represents such an
organization does, actually, look like a COI to me.

Don’t get me wrong… I like KC and I think CAIDA does some great stuff.

I just don’t think it serves an Amateur Radio purpose and thus doesn’t really
belong in 44.0.0.0/8.

Caida has been using an amateur radio resource as far back as 2001, when we
couldn't even be blessed to get 44net space for our own legitimate radio use.
I'm sure I have the message from Brian denying it in my archives.

I'm sure you can pursue legal avenues if you feel this went super sideways.
you should do that

I suspect that’s not unlikely, but I’m still trying to learn more about what and how
it happened first.

Owen
KB6MER