[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Protective UsageTransferPolicyforIPv4 Address

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 04:26:23PM -0800, Aaron Hughes wrote:
> I would have to agree with Chris and add that not only would it
> be rough to renumber.  Many peers, particularly where there are
> language barriers, would have an exceptionally hard time renumbering.
> For all of us who have ever changed our ASN, or merged an ASN, we
> know there are always a few that never renumber and you have to
> eventually drop them as a peer.

Note that I've seen this done twice in Europe (years ago, and I
can't remember the exchanges, I think they were both in ex-soviet
states though).  The method was:

Existing block is a.b.c.0/24

Exchange point operator announcex x.y.z.0/24 is the new block.

Providers to a 1:1 mapping of sessions in a.b.c.0/24 to x.y.z.0/24
over a period of time (2 weeks?).

Exchange point operator announces you take down a.b.c.0/24 sessions.

Both times I believe it was done in under a month, and with almost
no pairwise communication.  There was no need for two ISP's to speak
with each other, they simply duplicated what they already had.

It's a very different situation than something like a ASN change, or a
merger change where you have to communicate specific change details to
each peer.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20090211/ec5f0574/attachment.sig>