A Question
Valentin Hilbig nospam at nospam.geht.net
Mon Feb 5 14:45:55 CET 2001
My personal thoughts about this: As a LIR technician you should know: This is perfectly legal because inescapable. According to RIPE regulations, you have to return your addresses when you drop the connection to a LIR. Only addresses which can be reached from Internet directly may continue to exist and PA addresses from another ISP are never reachable from Internet. As the addresses are PA and not PI you have to renumber your network. The customer has to be made aware of this fact by the LIR. In case the customer wasn't informed about this fact that changing the uplink provider means to change IPs too, this is a problem between the old uplink and the customer and not about the new uplink, as the new uplink cannot be held responsible for errors somebody other did. This even holds in case that the customer has 2 or more independent Internet connections. In this case the customer should switch to BGP4 and do following: a) Get some PI address space. I cannot recommend this as PI address space is not as good as PA and you cannot be sure that all ISPs in the world accept announcements with a higher prefix than /20. From reachability point of view PI addresses are definitively a problem if you care about the fact that one might have to provide best possible service to the customers. If you can ignore that perhaps you cannot reach some weird edges in asia or so, then take PI, but be sure to get a least a /24 block. I know someone myself who is happy with his /23 PI block. And with PI you never have to renumber if you change your uplink. b) Get some PA address space and redistribute it into BGP4. I cannot recommend this as PA addresses have the problem that many ISPs filter them according to the routing database. And I as a BGP4 sysop would ignore smaller aggregations in routing entries, as they are redundant or maybee an error. As a result the IPs don't take the shortest path back to the customer which may lead to higher costs at the customer's side. Besides the higher costs redistributing PA into BGP4 should have no bad sideeffect (or am I not aware of something?). In Europe the possibly higher imposed cost factor is so extreme, that I definitively can only discourage from using PA for BGP4 redistribution (in case you have M uplinks it my be that you have M times the traffic price when M-1 of your uplink lines go down). Another bad fact is that with PA you have to renumber when you drop the link to the LIR which issued the IPs. c) Become your own LIR. I can recommed this in case that you go multihomed with your own AS and don't want to renumber any more in future. Note that this is exactly what I am currently doing here ;) OK, that's my opinion, but I am no lawyer. -Tino PS: I send this to the list even that I read the other posts ;) ----- Original Message ----- From: "SAEED KHADEMI" <saeed at vax.ipm.ac.ir> To: <local-ir at ripe.net> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:28 AM Subject: A Question > [ Moderator note: changed local-ir at ripe.net -> lir-wg at ripe.net ] > > > Hello, > Dear coleagues, Please excuse me if this is not the right place for > this kind of questions. > I am working as a LIR hostmaster since 5 years ago. Due to the act of > people of another LIR, a question has rised in my mind. And I want to > know about any defined regulation in this regard. > The Question: > > Is it legal that technical persons of one LIR, ask their customer to > return other LIR assignments, because the customer has asked for new > IP assignment? > This has been accured many times. Customer having some IP assignments > from LIR-1, are applying for new IP assignments from LIR-2. But people > at LIR-2 are saying that if you want new IP assignments, you HAVE TO > return LIR-1 assignments !!!!!!! > > Any comment? > > Kind Regards, > IPM LOCAL REGISTRY, Tehran/Iran > Saeed. > > >
[ lir-wg Archives ]