In message <5815013F.2080502@foobar.org>, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
But my overall point remains. If there were ever to be an election where we were all asked who we wanted to see become the once and future Routing Police, the RIRs would not be my own personal first choice.
Great, we're agreed then. So why do you keep on bringing them up in this context and criticising them whenever someone squats some block of address space?
References please? *I* didn't introduce the topic of RIRs into this thread. It would appear that Ken Chase did that: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-October/088943.html Later on, I bemoaned what I still feel is a rather lousey WHOIS referrals system, among and between the various RIR WHOIS data bases... with respect to *allocations* (not route registrations)... and it was entirely appropriate for me to mention that, in this thread, as the problem most definitely did impact not only _my_ ability to figure out who the bleep, if anyone, 103.11.67.0/24 is actually registered to, but actually, anyone's ability to do so, including, apparently, bgp.he.net. But this criticism has/had nothing whatever to do, specifically, with either routing or the (hypothetical) Routing Police. If the totality of the RIR WHOIS data bases are needlessly difficult to extract accurate information out of, then this negatively affects *all* uses (and all users) of these data bases, whether one is investigating possible routing squats, or whether one is just trying to figure out who currently owns the block that all of your corporate intellectual property has just been surreptitiously exfiltrated to. Regards, rfg