[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-139 No reassignment without network service
kkargel at polartel.com
Fri Apr 8 12:50:46 EDT 2011
Even if the customer does not participate in BGP routing, if there is any form of connectivity the ISP's ASN should end up being in at least one of the BGP advertised routes to the netblock. The connected ISP itself should be announcing the netblock in some (aggregated) form, even if the connection is 56K dialup.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Scott Helms
> Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 11:34 AM
> To: Owen DeLong
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-139 No reassignment without network
> On 4/8/2011 12:15 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > I disagree with you about the problems RIPE has experienced and I also
> don't feel that this measure
> > is draconian at all. It merely requires that LIRs in the ARIN region be
> providing network services to
> > the customers that they also provide address resources to.
> So rather than simply requiring that everyone play by the rules, the
> best solution is to simply say that if you're not providing connectivity
> you can't reassign? Can you define connectivity in a meaningful way?
> T-1? Ethernet? Serial link? How about a GRE or IP-IP tunnel? 56Kbps
> leased line? How would ARIN even know if connectivity is being provided
> or not? Not everyone who is multi-homed is announced via BGP, even
> though they should not everyone does.
> > I did not draw the same conclusions as you did from the discussion a
> couple of months back.
> Fair enough. Do find what my company has done to be objectionable?
> This the block from post in February about our practices.
> So what do you think of what we do today, and have for over 5 years,
> which is reassign or reallocate space to ISPs we are not providing a
> connection to in order for smaller providers to gain access to portable
> address space? We started doing this to help ISPs that don't qualify in
> some way (hard to be multi-homed in areas without more than one
> provider) or don't want to deal with ARIN. You could say we are a
> corner case and most of the customers that leverage this service from us
> are smaller (often in rural) retail ISPs, which ARIN seems to be
> recognizing have different needs from their larger brethren. I'd also
> point out that we push the same requirements down to those ISPs that
> ARIN places on us and frankly our ability to accurately assess
> utilization is _much_ better than ARIN's because in most of these cases
> we're also helping take care of the network infrastructure. That was
> the other reason we started leasing space, we were spending too much
> time renumbering networks for ISPs that were desperate to obtain lower
> cost Internet connectivity.
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML