European packet loss average increasing
My non-scientific measurements (i.e. pings to well known european sites) show an increase in packet loss to about 6%, the 10 day average previously was less than 1%. Neither ns.ebone.net nor auth1.ebone.net are answering queries. BGP data still looks normal KPNQwest data http://bgp.potaroo.net/as286/ So far I don't see much change in traffic levels at LINX http://www.linx.net/tools/stats/index.thtml AMS-IX graphs seem to have a glitch, or one heck of a DDOS. http://www.ams-ix.net/hugegraph.html
Re: European packet loss average increasing
For those who don't know, Ebone had a policy of zero packet loss on the network 99.5% of the time and we managed to exceed this on almost all of our links. You mean like every other service provider? :-)
Re: European packet loss average increasing
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Sabri Berisha wrote: AMS-IX graphs seem to have a glitch, or one heck of a DDOS. http://www.ams-ix.net/hugegraph.html This was a power outage. I doubt the dip in the graph, which looks to me like about 1G missing between 12:00-19:00 was just from that 3 second power outage, which happened after 2pm I think. Perhaps it was the result of the bogus routes being advertised by AS1200? Makes you wonder, where did 25200Gb of traffic disappear to? :) Paul -- Movie scripts no longer write, George Lucas shall
AS path fugliness?
Anyone else receiving huge as-path (more than 125) causing these: Jul 3 08:23:06 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 08:23:46 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 270 Jul 3 08:27:45 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 274 Jul 3 08:31:59 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 08:41:02 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 08:41:43 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 270 Jul 3 08:57:56 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 09:04:04 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 09:10:01 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 09:10:52 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 270 Jul 3 09:17:40 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 (per http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/35.shtml ) It started just after local Qwest routes apparently recovered from some kind of nose-dive. We're still sorting through the tables trying to find out who, thus far longest I've found is about 20. Mike
Re: AS path fugliness?
Anyone else receiving huge as-path (more than 125) causing these: Yes, but I saw it only once from four different sources: Through AS1: Jul 3 07:23:56: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 266 Through AS6461: Jul 3 07:22:51: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 266 Through AS2828: Jul 3 07:22:52: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 266 Through AS4513: Jul 3 07:22:47: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 266 -mark
Re: AS path fugliness?
Of course it would be towards the end of the table.
Here's a sample of the more detailed log at http://www.rockynet.com/wtf.html
*i205.139.72.0 a.b.c.d 101 0 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
* i a.b.c.d 101 0 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
* e.f.g.h 25 0 701 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
neighbor ids's are munged, otherwise it's a straight dump of what we're
getting. I've gotten two other confirmations as well.
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lewinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 9:46 AM
Subject: AS path fugliness?
Anyone else receiving huge as-path (more than 125) causing these:
Jul 3 08:23:06 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:23:46 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 08:27:45 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 274
Jul 3 08:31:59 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:41:02 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:41:43 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 08:57:56 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:04:04 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:10:01 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:10:52 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 09:17:40 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
(per http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/35.shtml )
It started just after local Qwest routes apparently recovered from some
kind
of nose-dive. We're still sorting through the tables trying to find out
who,
thus far longest I've found is about 20.
Mike
Re: AS path fugliness?
I see the same from AS 16517 -
* 205.139.72.0 216.177.55.5 500 15076 701
3561 23037 {80,109,122,...
Note that our paths diverge after AS 23037
Could IMC Internet (ASN-IMC-BGP) be the source of the problem.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
Mike Lewinski wrote:
Of course it would be towards the end of the table.
Here's a sample of the more detailed log at http://www.rockynet.com/wtf.html
*i205.139.72.0 a.b.c.d 101 0 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
* i a.b.c.d 101 0 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
* e.f.g.h 25 0 701 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
neighbor ids's are munged, otherwise it's a straight dump of what we're
getting. I've gotten two other confirmations as well.
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lewinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 9:46 AM
Subject: AS path fugliness?
Anyone else receiving huge as-path (more than 125) causing these:
Jul 3 08:23:06 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:23:46 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 08:27:45 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 274
Jul 3 08:31:59 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:41:02 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:41:43 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 08:57:56 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:04:04 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:10:01 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:10:52 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 09:17:40 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
(per http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/35.shtml )
It started just after local Qwest routes apparently recovered from some
kind
of nose-dive. We're still sorting through the tables trying to find out
who,
thus far longest I've found is about 20.
Mike
--
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
This e-mail may contain confidential and proprietary information of
Multicast Technologies, Inc, subject to Non-Disclosure Agreements
T.M. Eubanks
Multicast Technologies, Inc
10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Phone : 703-293-9624 Fax : 703-293-9609
e-mail : [EMAIL
Re: AS path fugliness?
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I see the same from AS 16517 -
* 205.139.72.0 216.177.55.5 500 15076 701
3561 23037 {80,109,122,...
Note that our paths diverge after AS 23037
Could IMC Internet (ASN-IMC-BGP) be the source of the problem.
We've opened a ticket with CW. The tech I spoke with wasn't aware of this
issue. It does appear that all affected netblocks are IMC Internet, and that
CW provides the IP space to them.
Mike
Re: AS path fugliness?
We've had 4 crashes with chunk corruption On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 10:46, Mike Lewinski wrote: Anyone else receiving huge as-path (more than 125) causing these: Jul 3 08:23:06 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 08:23:46 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 270 Jul 3 08:27:45 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 274 Jul 3 08:31:59 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 08:41:02 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 08:41:43 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 270 Jul 3 08:57:56 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 09:04:04 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 09:10:01 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 Jul 3 09:10:52 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 270 Jul 3 09:17:40 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for aspath, requested size 268 (per http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/35.shtml ) It started just after local Qwest routes apparently recovered from some kind of nose-dive. We're still sorting through the tables trying to find out who, thus far longest I've found is about 20. Mike -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
FW: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees
TWiMC: No doubt most with the responsibility of doing so received this statement, but OWN 'M IF YOU GOT 'M--clean up the databases (Unfortunately for me I just paid a $250 on June 27th--lucky me.) j -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Member Services Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 3:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees At the ARIN IX Member's Meeting there was consensus expressed that transfer fees should be waived as a means of encouraging subscribers to participate in database cleanup. The database cleanup effort is a part of the database conversion project. There was overwhelming support for such a waiver for the remainder of the fiscal year. During its June 5 meeting the ARIN Board of Trustees approved a motion to waive the fees for the transfer of AS Numbers and IP addresses for the period extending from July 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. The Board meeting minutes can be viewed at: http://www.arin.net/library/minutes/bot/bot06052002.html ARIN Member Services
Re: AS path fugliness?
This has disappeared from here...
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I see the same from AS 16517 -
* 205.139.72.0 216.177.55.5 500 15076 701
3561 23037 {80,109,122,...
Note that our paths diverge after AS 23037
Could IMC Internet (ASN-IMC-BGP) be the source of the problem.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
Mike Lewinski wrote:
Of course it would be towards the end of the table.
Here's a sample of the more detailed log at
http://www.rockynet.com/wtf.html
*i205.139.72.0 a.b.c.d 101 0 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
* i a.b.c.d 101 0 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
* e.f.g.h 25 0 701 3561 23037
{1239,1785,2379,4323,4513,4546,4969,5006,5676,5778,6181,6253,6347,6395,6453,
6580,6993,7132,7795,10242,10346,10492,10625,10674,10726,10851,10910,10937,10
957,11101,11134,11169,11589,11657,11853,12094,12156,12163,12175,12221,13350,
13371,13443,13488,13568,13576,13578,13641,13790,13815,13882,14021,14130,1428
9,14359,14381,14452,14549,14564,14677,14685,14929,14990,15062,15150,15214,15
215,16477,16504,16554,16597,16631,16640,16707,16782,16852,16980,17033,17060,
17253,17304,18480,18548,18565,18618,18862,18866,18903,18957,19019,19024,1954
1,19746,19893,20045,20303,20316,20357,20458,21536,21591,21715,21822,21853,22
191,22219,22242,22299,22319,22389,22406,22476,22728,22764,22912,22960,23195,
23269,23306,23365,25639,25707,25905,26004} ?
neighbor ids's are munged, otherwise it's a straight dump of what we're
getting. I've gotten two other confirmations as well.
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lewinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 9:46 AM
Subject: AS path fugliness?
Anyone else receiving huge as-path (more than 125) causing these:
Jul 3 08:23:06 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:23:46 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 08:27:45 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 274
Jul 3 08:31:59 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:41:02 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 08:41:43 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 08:57:56 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:04:04 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:10:01 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
Jul 3 09:10:52 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 270
Jul 3 09:17:40 MDT: %BGP-3-INSUFCHUNKS: Insufficient chunk pools for
aspath, requested size 268
(per http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/35.shtml )
It started just after local Qwest routes apparently recovered from some
kind
of nose-dive. We're still sorting through the tables trying to find out
who,
thus far longest I've found is about 20.
Mike
--
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
This e-mail may contain confidential and proprietary information of
Multicast Technologies, Inc, subject to Non-Disclosure Agreements
T.M. Eubanks
Multicast Technologies, Inc
10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410
RE: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees
TWiMC: No doubt most with the responsibility of doing so received this statement, but OWN 'M IF YOU GOT 'M--clean up the databases (Unfortunately for me I just paid a $250 on June 27th--lucky me.) j -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Member Services Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 3:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees At the ARIN IX Member's Meeting there was consensus expressed that transfer fees should be waived as a means of encouraging subscribers to participate in database cleanup. The database cleanup effort is a part of the database conversion project. There was overwhelming support for such a waiver for the remainder of the fiscal year. During its June 5 meeting the ARIN Board of Trustees approved a motion to waive the fees for the transfer of AS Numbers and IP addresses for the period extending from July 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. The Board meeting minutes can be viewed at: http://www.arin.net/library/minutes/bot/bot06052002.html Please correct me if I am wrong. This is not allowing the practice of selling IPs or ASes, but it encourages those of us who have acquired other companies to consolidate all the registrations under a single NIC handle (for example) to reduce the total number of contacts floating out there? Is my understanding accurate? Thanks, DJ
RE: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees
Please correct me if I am wrong. This is not allowing the practice of selling IPs or ASes, I've never really come around to fully understand the notion (more and more common, it seems) of _selling_ such..? (Maybe I'm an idealist :) but it encourages those of us who have acquired other companies to consolidate all the registrations under a single NIC handle (for example) to reduce the total number of contacts floating out there? Is my understanding accurate? I would hope so, in a general perspective. mh Thanks, DJ
RE: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees
The intension is to get the information correct. If company X took over another company who owned a couple /whatevers, or if a company merely changed their name and wanted their ASN to represent that, it would cost $250 to change. Many companies, who aren't in the we sell IPs business, don't care if the name matches the IP on IANA or ARIN. So, in effort to get the databases straight for the impending conversion, they've waived the fee. So, it is an opportunity to transfer the lease (not ownership) of IPs without the additional cost. Not sure what the conversion entails, but I know they've recently changed their godforsaken templates... to newly improved godforsaken templates. ---DB cleanup is good for all who have to troubleshoot global IP routing--- j -Original Message- From: Deepak Jain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 3:22 PM To: jnelson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees TWiMC: No doubt most with the responsibility of doing so received this statement, but OWN 'M IF YOU GOT 'M--clean up the databases (Unfortunately for me I just paid a $250 on June 27th--lucky me.) j -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Member Services Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 3:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Waiver of IP and AS Number Transfer Fees At the ARIN IX Member's Meeting there was consensus expressed that transfer fees should be waived as a means of encouraging subscribers to participate in database cleanup. The database cleanup effort is a part of the database conversion project. There was overwhelming support for such a waiver for the remainder of the fiscal year. During its June 5 meeting the ARIN Board of Trustees approved a motion to waive the fees for the transfer of AS Numbers and IP addresses for the period extending from July 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. The Board meeting minutes can be viewed at: http://www.arin.net/library/minutes/bot/bot06052002.html Please correct me if I am wrong. This is not allowing the practice of selling IPs or ASes, but it encourages those of us who have acquired other companies to consolidate all the registrations under a single NIC handle (for example) to reduce the total number of contacts floating out there? Is my understanding accurate? Thanks, DJ
