[lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued

On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Daniel Roesen wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 02:45:45PM +0200, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> > Well, if we consider the RIPE db OR announced (or both - which is what it
> > is supposed to be if the latter is true) it's not that hard. First, a
> > requirement to register the ASnumber policy to keep it would be a easy
> > task. Basically RIPE could then check assigned AS:es to registred. Still,
> > the object does not have to be upto-date or actually reflecting anything.
> > Second, as I belive there is so few assigned AS:es that never make it to
> > the global routing tabele, I would like to define a few points of checks.
> > These could even be route servers and this could be included in the
> > automation. It could also be from the view of the test-traffic boxes.
> 
> Kurt, noBGP table check whatsoever can verify very valid setups like
> the one I described a few weeks back. (AS702 backup uplink using 702:80
> community). What should the ASN holder do to prove the existance of
> this backup upstream? Take down their main link?
> 

Contingent BGP announcements are valid.  Our view should not be to hurt
ISPs.  If one comes along and says he is doing a backup link and can bring
documentation from his backup upstream, it is up to RIPE to verify it and
accept it.  Not impossible.

> 
> Regards,
> Daniel
> 

Hank Nussbacher