ARIN-prop-275: Hijacking Authorization Not-intended [Archived]
OUT OF DATE?
Here in the Vault, information is published in its final form and then not changed or updated. As a result, some content, specifically links to other pages and other references, may be out-of-date or no longer available.
Proposal Originator: Jordi Palet Martinez
When prop-254 (Clarification on IPv6 Sub-assignments), it was not related, neither intended, to modify the “exclusivity” criterion.
Of course, it was not intended to provide an explicit authorization for incidental or transient uses of address space by third parties, which in fact it is a hijacking of addresses.
However, surprisingly, the resulting text (last paragraph of the NRPM section 2.5), after the ARIN AC editorial process, is doing that.
This policy proposal tries to fix this specific text in the NRPM section 2.5 to avoid that misinterpretation.
Note that the incidental or transient use of address space by third parties shall not be considered a reassignment or a violation of the exclusive use criterion.
Note that the incidental or transient use of address space by third parties, within the network of the recipient organization, shall not be considered a reassignment or a violation of the exclusive use criterion
Timetable for Implementation: Immediate
Anything Else: Situation in other regions: There is not equivalent explicit hijacking authorization in other RIRs.