On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>
> If the ASN gets legitimately issued to someone else and the squatter
> proceeds to hijack it from the legitimate registrant they should be turned
> off if the ISP is going to do the right thing according to whois.
>
> ~Seth
>
If you forgo
On 4/4/16 9:50 PM, David Huberman wrote:
Operators generally want to do the right thing. But at the same time,
there's no real leverage over a paying customer who is breaking no laws
and just never paid ARIN's bills and has out-of-date contact info. You
can tell them to go talk to ARIN. But y
Operators generally want to do the right thing. But at the same time, there's
no real leverage over a paying customer who is breaking no laws and just never
paid ARIN's bills and has out-of-date contact info. You can tell them to go
talk to ARIN. But you can't disco them or turn off your BGP
Would operators take hijacking an ASN issued to someone more seriously than
squatting on an ASN issued to no one?
I'd assume no one cares about the risk to the squatter.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.mid
On Apr 4, 2016, at 8:17 PM, Jon Lewis
mailto:jle...@lewis.org>> wrote:
If ARIN has a large pool of ASNs which it believes ARIN is responsible for, and
are not being paid for, i.e. ASN squatters, then WTH are these ASN's not
published in whois as Unused/Reserved/Reclaimed/whatever term/language
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, David Huberman wrote:
1) It's a trade-off, right? A network operator who absolutely must have
a 2-byte either has equipment that hasn't been updated in 6+ years, or
is having an issue like BGP communities where the solution they want to
implement requires a 2-byte (rather
Richard Jimmerson: may we please know how many two-byte ASNs are currently in
the hold bucket?
From: Job Snijders
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 6:56 PM
To: David Farmer
Cc: David Huberman; arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2-byte ASN policy
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 05:50:02PM -0500, David Farmer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:56 PM, David Huberman
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
>
> Do you know of a list of BOGON ASNs?
Go to http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/ and look under the "Possible
Bogus ASs" section.
A more detailed report can b
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:56 PM, David Huberman
wrote:
>
>
> ARIN has traditionally had a large number of AS numbers (almost all
> 2-byte) in the "hold" bucket. These are ASNs which have been revoked for
> years due to non-payment and separation from the RSA. But they're still
> found in the
6.10.1 and 4.4 speak to critical infrastructure. 6.10.1 has the more
concise definition and is quoted below. 4.4 has been edited, but includes
the same components, just more spread out.
ARIN will make micro-allocations to critical infrastructure providers
of the Internet,
including publi
Thanks for the good reply, Job.
So two things.
1) It's a trade-off, right? A network operator who absolutely must have a
2-byte either has equipment that hasn't been updated in 6+ years, or is having
an issue like BGP communities where the solution they want to implement
requires a 2-byte (ra
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 08:56:34PM +, David Huberman wrote:
> ARIN has traditionally had a large number of AS numbers (almost all
> 2-byte) in the "hold" bucket. These are ASNs which have been revoked
> for years due to non-payment and separation from the RSA. But they're
> still found in the
Chris's excellent question jogs my brain to ask a related-but-different
question:
ARIN has traditionally had a large number of AS numbers (almost all 2-byte) in
the "hold" bucket. These are ASNs which have been revoked for years due to
non-payment and separation from the RSA. But they're stil
Do we have information on how many 2-byte ASNs get returned, compared to the
rate of requests for them? Is there a surplus?
> On Apr 3, 2016, at 11:36 AM, Adam Thompson wrote:
>
> IMO, 2-byte ASNs should simply be retired and not reallocated. "Solving the
> technical problem", as described in
> On Apr 3, 2016, at 11:52 , Ron Grant wrote:
>
> The biggest technical problem with 4-byte ASNs that I'm aware of comes when
> propagating BGP communities - AFAIK even with extended communities, you can't
> specify two 4-byte ASNs in a single community.
>
> This can be worked around when usi
The AC abandoned 2015-6. Anyone dissatisfied with this decision may
initiate a petition. The deadline to begin a petition will be five
business days after the AC's draft meeting minutes are published.
The minutes from the ARIN Advisory Council's 17 March 2016 meeting have
been published:
https
16 matches
Mail list logo
