[ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2

Hi Nick, All,

On 2/6/13 3:30 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 04/02/2013 22:12, Måns Nilsson wrote:
>> The "completely estranged LRH holder organisation" is not that common, I
>> believe. Wasting electrons on this corner case is not fruitful.
> Problem is, I'm not sure it's a corner case; nor am I sure that the
> squatters are corner cases, nor the abandoned address blocks.
>
> Has the RIPE NCC done any preliminary analysis of the ERX space in terms of:
>
> - rough consistency of link between inetnum: owner and mntner
> - when was the last time the resources were updated

- According to the initial ERX transfer list, 339 inetnum objects have 
been deleted. This may however mean that more specific objects have been 
created by the maintainer.

- 393 inetnum objects have RIPE-NCC-LOCKED-MNT in the mnt-by line. These 
objects were registered in the RIPE DB before the ERX transfer took 
place, and were maintained using RIPE-NCC-NONE-MNT. When this was 
deprecated the RIPE NCC locked all objects referencing it. As these 
objects are still locked, no one is currently managing this data.

- 851 inetnum objects have the ERX auto-generated maintainer (in the 
form ERX-NET-138-81-MNT) as mnt-by. The holders 'may' have been given 
the password and are 'able' to manage this data, but may or may not have 
done so. Others were not given the password and are not managing the 
data. Without deeper analysis we can't separate these groups.

- 764 inetnum objects have replaced the ERX aut-generated maintainer (in 
the form ERX-NET-138-81-MNT) with a different maintainer. This is a 
clear indication they have taken control of this data since the transfer.

- 1835 inetnum objects have the following line removed (which was added 
during the ERX project) 'remarks: **** INFORMATION FROM ARIN/RIPE OBJECT 
****' This is an indication they have taken control of this data since 
the transfer.

- 141 inetnum comply with none of the above. The inetnum objects contain 
no RIPE-NCC-LOCKED-MNT maintainer and never contained an auto-generated 
maintainer, and still contain the ERX remarks lines. Without deeper 
analysis we cannot say anything about this group.


I hope this provides you with enough information to quantify the effort.
If more information is needed we can do a deeper analysis of the numbers
above.

> - potential LIR association

To identify potential LIRs we looked at the ASes which were seen 
originating prefixes from the ERX space in RIS in the last week. Out of 
the 4050 ERX blocks, we found 1498 cases where (partly) matching 
prefixes have an origin AS which can be associated an LIR. In total 775 
unique ASNs were found:

- 89 of the 775 AS numbers are registered with an RIR other than the 
RIPE NCC
- 109 of the 775 AS numbers have been transferred to the RIPE region 
during the ERX project but are not associated to an LIR
- 577 of the 775 AS numbers are associated (directly or via sponsoring) 
to 365 unique LIRs

> - whether prefix is visible in dfz

Of the 4,050 entries we found, 1,673 IP ranges are currently not in RIS 
(not visible in the routing tables) - they have not been seen for at 
least one week. This includes more specific IP ranges than the ones 
registered.


I hope this helps.
Best regards,

Andrea Cima
RIPE NCC

> I realise that this is very ill-specified.
>
> This might be useful in quantifying how much effort it would be worth
> expending in what you and Hank refer to as "corner cases", but which I
> would feel were more common.
>
> Nick
>
>
>