Hi Ronald,

> Do dues-paying members want to be underwriting the use of bogon ASNs

by members whose ASN registrations have lapased due to non-payment of
relevant annual fees?

I feel like that is not what we are trying to discuss here and is outside our scope, maybe in the scope of AP-WG. (I don't know if this is in their scope though tbh)

So could we please look at data for reserved ASNs (not unallocated ASNs) without trying to argue that any bogon is a bogon.

If so we could have a much more productive discussion.

-Cynthia

On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 10:13 PM Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote:

In message <f77da251-97b8-8527-9ac6-cb06fc281255@interall.co.il>,
Hank Nussbacher <hank@interall.co.il> wrote:

>Thanks Ronald, but that doesn't answer my question. I was hoping to see
>route objects which reference *reserved* ASNs - not route objects for
>unallocated ASNs.

Hank, I'm frankly not sure what the value of such a sub-list would be.

A bogon ASN is a bogon ASN, no?

Do dues-paying members want to be underwriting the use of bogon ASNs
by members whose ASN registrations have lapased due to non-payment of
relevant annual fees?

Regards,
rfg