August 2002 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [lir-wg] Webcasting Meetings
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 06 Aug '02

06 Aug '02

>Hi, > >I do also second Stephen's proposal, it's a good idea. Before I throw in my (historical :-) 2 Groschen, is this the right place to discuss remote participation? Looking at the goal (supporting the open policy process), it is - looking at technology and implementation issues, I'm not so sure? Wilfried.

1 0

RE: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued
by Lu, Ping 05 Aug '02

05 Aug '02

Look like those singlehomed ASs need to shutdown their primary link and activate their backup link so RIPE NCC could verify their LEGAL use of ASes :( For the unused ASs, I think an annual renewal fee is a whole lot easier to verify their intent to use then go thru INCOMPLETE global routing table and non-distribute whois db :) Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Oliver Bartels [mailto:oliver@bartels.de] > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 9:31 AM > To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued > > > Hello, > On Mon, 5 Aug 2002 14:52:13 +0200 (CEST), Sebastian Willing wrote: > >ASs allocated to RIPE: 6016 > >ASs unassigned: 616 > >ASs singlehomed: 224 > >ASs unused: 1526 > Good peace of work, interesting ... > > This statistics shows that the typical problem case isn't a > singlehomed > ASn, it's just an *unused at all* ASn. > > Thus it seems it isn't necessary to establish a big buerocracy > with forms to be signed etc. (like we German tend to do ;-|, its > just sufficient to validate their use in the global table and/or view > peer/upstream AS references (listing in as-set or aut-num object > of partner) corresponding to the ASn in the RIPE database. > > IMHO this should give a large yield (1500+x) with little effort > and covers most "I am $BIGCOMPANY and need a ASn because > its rare and for free" cases. > > Best Regards > Oliver Bartels > > > > Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany > oliver(a)bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0 > >

1 0

New Document available: RIPE-256
by RIPE NCC Document Announcement Service 05 Aug '02

05 Aug '02

New/Revised RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A revised/new document is available from the RIPE document store: "IPv6 Address Space Policy for Internet Exchange Points" Short content description ------------------------- Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) are used to exchange Internet traffic between different Internet Service Providers (ISPs). Many Exchange Point operators require address space for the peering mesh that is independent from any of the address space in use by member networks. Accessing the RIPE document store --------------------------------- You can access the RIPE documents in HTML format via WWW. "IPv6 Address Space Policy for Internet Exchange Points" is available at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-256.html The RIPE document store is also available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The URLs for the new documents on the FTP-server are: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-256.ps PostScript version ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-256.txt plain text version Kind Reagrds, Jeroen Bet Webmaster RIPE NCC

1 0

New Document available: RIPE-243
by RIPE NCC Document Announcement Service 05 Aug '02

05 Aug '02

New/Revised RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A revised/new document is available from the RIPE document store: "New Values of the "status:" Attribute for inet6num Objects". Short content description ------------------------- This document describes the new values of the "status:" attribute for inet6num objects and their impact on database operation. Accessing the RIPE document store --------------------------------- You can access the RIPE documents in HTML format via WWW. "New Values of the "status:" Attribute for inet6num Objects" is available from the WWW at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/docs/new-value-status.html The RIPE document store is also available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The URLs for the new documents on the FTP-server are: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-243.ps PostScript version ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-243.txt plain text version Kind Regards, Jeroen Bet Webmaster RIPE NCC

1 0

Antw: Re: [lir-wg] Webcasting Meetings
by Wilson Mehringer 05 Aug '02

05 Aug '02

Hi, I would also like to support this proposal. It sounds like a call for democracy..on-site or online. It goes without saying that there is a business element to these meetings and a good number of attendees/companies will opt for the webcasts. Nothing against business....as long as it is ethical. Wilson >>> Matthew J Robinson <mjrobinson(a)genuity.net> 05.08.2002 13:34 >>> Hi all, I'd like to lend my support to this proposal. At it's simplest this is a few people with a few web cams and a bit of multicast support from a couple of networks. I'm fairly sure I can get some support from the multicast people on our network. Any one definately going that has a webcam and would be prepared to run a trial? I'll offer what help I can. I admit to knowing little about webcam software but I can route packets ;-) Matthew > Hi > I am formaly asking that if not RIPE 43 then all future meetings will be > webcast so that all memebers who want to attend can attend the meeting. > Otherwise this is by no means an equal opportunity meeing to attend and is > only open to those who can get their expenses justified for holiday > destinations with the express intention of going to the meeting, which lets > face it in the current climate is nigh impossible. Its not that i do not > appreciate the venues or that the meetings are not the place to go, its just > getting harder to get to them. > I wish to see a broader section of the community contributing to the > RIPE process which is unique and a fine foundation for the RIPE community to > come together, its just that the coming together is much harder for most > now. Otherwise the only views expressed and heard are those of the people > who can attend physicaly which is not the majority so limiting the scope and > participation of the community at large. > > Regards, > > > Stephen Burley > WorldCom EMEA Hostmaster > SB855-RIPE > >

1 0

Re: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 02 Aug '02

02 Aug '02

Hi Kurtis, >> And defining the proper place for a registration is another "minor" >> technical issue >> (Q: portability of AS numbers amongst RIR service areas?). >> But we could give it a try... > >Well, portably I guess is an issue anyway as the database refer to each >other (or do they only do that if there is no match? I am not really into >the whois data...). I am not aware of any (real) implementation of RPS-Dist yet... So - no, not really (a nice research topic in itself!). I was simply picking some "random" numbers here: > wripe as1855 % This is the RIPE Whois server. % The objects are in RPSL format. % Please visit http://www.ripe.net/rpsl for more information. % Rights restricted by copyright. % See http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/copyright.html as-block: AS1 - AS1876 descr: ARIN ASN block remarks: These AS numbers are further assigned by ARIN remarks: to ARIN members and end-users in the ARIN region admin-c: ARIN1-RIPE tech-c: ARIN1-RIPE mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT mnt-lower: RIPE-NCC-NONE-MNT changed: ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net 20010423 source: RIPE role: American Registry for Internet Numbers address: ARIN, see http://www.arin.net admin-c: ARIN1-RIPE tech-c: ARIN1-RIPE nic-hdl: ARIN1-RIPE remarks: For more information on ARIN assigned blocks, connect remarks: to ARIN's whois database, whois.arin.net. mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-MNT changed: ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net 20010508 source: RIPE > warin 1855 Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc. (ASN-DISN-PILOTNET1) 150 Cambridge Park Drive Cambridge, MA 02140 US Autonomous System Name: DISN-PILOTNET1 Autonomous System Number: 1855 Coordinator: Wojcik, Jane H. (JHW19-ARIN) jwojcik(a)MEDIA.MIT.EDU (617) 253-0325 Record last updated on 27-May-1992. Database last updated on 1-Aug-2002 20:00:38 EDT. The ARIN Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Network Information: Networks, ASN's, and related POC's. Please use the whois server at rs.internic.net for DOMAIN related Information and whois.nic.mil for NIPRNET Information. > wripe as1755 % This is the RIPE Whois server. % The objects are in RPSL format. % Please visit http://www.ripe.net/rpsl for more information. % Rights restricted by copyright. % See http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/copyright.html as-block: AS1 - AS1876 descr: ARIN ASN block remarks: These AS numbers are further assigned by ARIN remarks: to ARIN members and end-users in the ARIN region admin-c: ARIN1-RIPE tech-c: ARIN1-RIPE mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT mnt-lower: RIPE-NCC-NONE-MNT changed: ripe-dbm(a)ripe.net 20010423 source: RIPE aut-num: AS1755 as-name: AS1755 descr: Ebone Transit Core import: from AS1 accept ANY import: from AS109 accept AS109 [ ...... ] # [ ...... ] # half a mile of routing policy and communities :-) [ ...... ] # mnt-by: AS1755-MNT mnt-lower: AS1755-MNT changed: bart-apps(a)ebone.net 20020702 source: RIPE > warin 1755 Ebone Consortium (ASN-EBONE-INTERNAL) STUPI Box 9129 S-102 72 Stockholm SE Autonomous System Name: EBONE-INTERNAL Autonomous System Number: 1755 Record last updated on 19-Feb-1992. Database last updated on 1-Aug-2002 20:00:38 EDT. The ARIN Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Network Information: Networks, ASN's, and related POC's. Please use the whois server at rs.internic.net for DOMAIN related Information and whois.nic.mil for NIPRNET Information. And while "we" RIPE DB do have a referral mechanism in place for _domains_, .... ;-) And I think both ARIN and APNIC are working on a ("central", similar to the RIPE Region's) routing registry, but it may still be a long way... Cheers, Wilfried.

2 1

Re: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 02 Aug '02

02 Aug '02

>> Not really important, but just to avoid being counted as agreeing :-) > >Horrible thought? :) No :-) >>> Anyway, I think that everyone have suggested to do both with a OR in >>> between. >> >> ...no objection against the OR, but the result of the OR should not be >> the _only_ input to a decision process. It would be an efficient >> mechanism to be used _in support_ of continued AS# holdership, though. > >Agreed. OTH, this discussion to me was for new AS assignments that are not >yet used. Which is somewhat easier to deal with than with existing AS:es. >AS286 beeing an example that is announced but the question is if we can >consider it "as in use" ? True. But to me it was not obvious yet, which "subset" of existing AS#s we are talking about, and whether the procedure would be pro-active only or post-factum as well. >>> Basically just claiming that "yes I do peer at backwater-IX with >>> Farm-IP and Countryside Networks and I don't get transit from anywhere" >>> should not be enouhg. >> >> I disagree. > >I read this as you mean that RIPE NCC shoudl trust the word of the AS >number holder? Yes. Please see below. >>> RIPE should be able to verify that this is true. >> >> Some nit-picking... >> >> RIPE (the community): I don't think so - other than having access to >> some publicly accessible documentation, e.g. in the Routing Registry. > >My mistake. I ment the RIPE NCC. I was reading it that way, too. But my experience with talking to people who for whatever reason get hold of these messages, and do not necessarily have the "implicit" mindset get mixed up easily. >> The NCC: maybe, if and when we can agree on the criteria, >> and the cost for verification vs. the result. > >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 AS number policy to keep it would be a easy >task. ...and would actually, sort of through the backdoor, help to achieve better population of the Routing Registry. As you state, the quality of the data is a different issue, I agree. And defining the proper place for a registration is another "minor" technical issue (Q: portability of AS numbers amongst RIR service areas?). But we could give it a try... >Basically RIPE could then check assigned AS:es to registred. Still, >the object does not have to be upto-date or actually reflecting anything. Correct. >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. I think we've been there: there is some chance that you cannot see those beasts from those places. Thus my claim (see above) that a statement of use (format to be discusssed) should be enough. For me it's a matter of the "10/90 rule": the cost of achieving 90% of your goal is 10%, doing the remainnig 10% is going to cost you 90%... >Best regards, > >- kurtis - Cheers, Wilfried.

2 1

AS Number Policy - continued
by leo vegoda 02 Aug '02

02 Aug '02

Dear Colleagues, Thank you for your comments on my initial questions and the wide ranging discussion that took place. I would like to continue this discussion by asking two more questions: 1. Should the RIPE NCC check whether Autonomous System Numbers it has assigned become multi-homed within six months? If you would like us to do this, the RIPE NCC proposes to do so by looking at routing policies registered in the Routing Registry. 2. Should the policy be changed so that AS numbers not in use can be reclaimed? If there is consensus on this we propose to reclaim AS numbers of networks not multi-homed after six months. Kind regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services

11 23

RE: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 02 Aug '02

02 Aug '02

Tanya, >What would you suggest for a definition of "not in use"? 1st attempt (formally): "For an extended period of time [a] not used for the unique identification of one or more routing processes and/or relationships, on any EGP speaking device. No intent to used the AS number for any such purpose within an extended period of time [b]." [a] period t.b.d. by the community, but not shorter than 6 month [b] period t.b.d. by the community, but not shorter than 12 month 2nd attempt (down to earth approach :-) "Not used at all, no intent to use, simply sitting on as desk; or the entity no longer being aware of it's AS# holdership." >I agree that we do need to define "not in use". :-) And by the way I agree that the community should _encourage_ recycling of AS numbers! >Tanya Wwilfried.

2 1

RE: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued
by Lu, Ping 01 Aug '02

01 Aug '02

Yes, RIPE should definitely reclaim unused ASN but how is the question. 1. Global routing table is not complete due to various reasons discussed before 2. Whois database could be out-of-date ( If I didn't return the ASN by myself, I probably won't delete my aut-num object as well). 3. Multi-home doesn't mean Multi-LIR. Most tier-1 ISPs have more than one ASN and there are definitely some end-users connect to two ASNs but under one company. 4. Is RIPE doing this free-of-charge or the paying LIR will expense this. By saying this, I am thinking maybe ASN should be renewed with an annual fee ? Euro 50 or wait $50 is cheaper now :) Ping Lu Cable & Wireless USA Network Tools and Analysis Group W: +1-703-292-2359 E: plu(a)cw.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet [mailto:woeber@cc.univie.ac.at] > Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:52 AM > To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net > Cc: woeber(a)cc.univie.ac.at > Subject: Re: [lir-wg] AS Number Policy - continued > > > Dear Leo! > > >I would like to continue this discussion by asking two more > >questions: > > > >1. Should the RIPE NCC check whether Autonomous System Numbers > > it has assigned become multi-homed within six months? If you > > would like us to do this, the RIPE NCC proposes to do so by > > looking at routing policies registered in the Routing Registry. > > NO, > > because the method proposed in your Q (and those discussed in this > context on the mailng list) is not going to provide reliable data. > > I am prepared to answer YES, > - if this is done for statistical reasons ONLY, > - and any data getting published carries an appropriate > "fuzziness disclaimer" (tbd). > > >2. Should the policy be changed so that AS numbers not in use > > can be reclaimed? If there is consensus on this we propose > > to reclaim AS numbers of networks not multi-homed after six > > months. > > NO. > > With the qualification that > I am more than willing to change that to a YES > as soon as > - we have an agreed definition of "not in use", > - and we have agreed on the procedures (and the cost for > verification) > to check, plus the impact on the performance of the > Hostmaster Role. > > >Kind regards, > > > >-- > >leo vegoda > >RIPE NCC > >Registration Services > > Regards, > Wilfried > > _________________________________:____________________________ > _________ > Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at > UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 > Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 > A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID > 0xF0ACB369 > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~~~~~~~~~ >

1 0