On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 03:15:39PM +0000, James Aldridge wrote:

Andre Stiphout wrote:

...

But in the case the pullups go, signifying the end of a network, and there is no clear RIPE policy behind this, I suspect not many providers will care about getting these customers renumbered if these customers feel they retain sufficient global connectivity. The net result is an increase of the size of the routing table.

Is this detailed in the LIR contract or something and what is the value of that contract if the LIR disappears, but the customers find connectivity elsewhere?

I think that ripe-185 is pretty clear on registry colsures:

| If the registry is closing as a Local IR, but will continue to provide | Internet connectivity to its customers as an ISP, the customers can continue | to use the address space already assigned to them. Assignments made by a | registry that is closed remain valid for as long as the original criteria | under which they were assigned remains valid. | | If the registry will no longer provide Internet connectivity to customers with | assigned address space, the assigned address space should be retrieved from | the users as they renumber. It is the Local IR's responsibility to help its | customers with renumbering.

and

| In general a period of 3 months should be allowed for the end user to complete | the transition to the new addresses. RFC 2008 "Implications of Various Address | Allocation Policies for Internet Routing" [Rekhter96a] recommends a grace | period of at least 30 days, and no longer than six months. For exceptional | cases, where the end user requests to keep both assignments for more than 6 | months, approval should be obtained for the proposed time frame from the RIPE | NCC.

James (Co-chair RIPE LIR-WG)

From Hank's email just now we can deduce that the latter part is not

Thanks, that is clear, but I'm worried that the LIR will no longer be around to effect that change, as Kurtis also indicates could happen, but in a different way. I guess the onus then falls on the LIRs that start announcing fragments of the original PA space. Will RIPE NCC track this to ensure that renumbering does happen? What I would like to see is that all SPs demand these customers, which I assume to be smaller than a /20, to renumber as some of you already indicated they will. This can only work across-the-board if RIPE NCC ensures that it does happen by chasing the LIRs in question (yes/no?). likely to happen. Any comments from RIPE NCC how they see this evolving? regards, andre