[126552] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Partial Use Of one Regions IP Block in another
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri May 21 00:22:47 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <53A6C7E936ED8544B1A2BC990D254F9464F915375D@MEMEXG1.HOST.local>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 21:21:51 -0700
To: John Lee <john@internetassociatesllc.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On May 20, 2010, at 9:13 PM, John Lee wrote:
> Some pseudo random thoughts and questions? (my BGP is rusty.)
>=20
> 1. Does it violate your AUP with APNIC?
>=20
Not if he has infrastructure in the remote location and infrastructure =
and/or HQ in APNIC region.
> 2. If the larger routing prefix is from APNIC will your upstream in =
the EMEA region filter or black hole the sub prefix since it is from =
APNIC and not RIPE and would appear to be a hijacked block? (In my =
experience in some European countries "rules" are more strictly enforced =
than in other areas of the globe. I will spare you the American, Russian =
and French standards organization joke.)
>=20
LoL... In my experience, the guys that are getting money from you will =
route what you want routed
unless they have reason to believe you are not legitimately entitled to =
route it.
> 3. It would appear that again since it is in an APNIC sub-prefix would =
you need to "carry" the packets from a PoP in APNIC region to your =
facility in the EMEA assuming the sub prefix is not large enough to be =
propagated in normal BPG updates?
>=20
If that is true, yes. i was assuming that he was using a sub-prefix =
length <=3D/24 for EMEA region. If he's trying to run a /25 or longer, =
then, life will indeed suck, but, not because of the RIR issues, because =
of the long-prefix problem.
> 4. And if the bits did get through for a period of time would the =
transit provider determine that they did not want to carry them any more =
and add filtering at any random point in time?
>=20
Unlikely if it's a legitimate route. It wouldn't appear any less =
legitimate than any other route and there are many inter-regional routes =
advertised just like this already that work just fine.
> These questions assume that you do not have a single transit provider =
that covers both of your locations in the two different regions and can =
"custom route" the packets.
>=20
LoL
Owen
> John (ISDN) Lee
> ________________________________________
> From: Net [funkyfun@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 8:06 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Partial Use Of one Regions IP Block in another
>=20
> Hi folks,
>=20
> Are there any policies set by internet registries and/or transit
> providers today that prohibits organizations from using a Partially
> used IP Block allocated in one region say AP through APNIC to be
> comissioned and Propagated in another region such as EMEA serviced by
> RIPE?.
>=20
> Obv, the best approach would be to acquire a new Block in the 2nd
> region through its own registry, but sometimes due to strict
> prvisioning timelines, legal delays in getting the necessary approvals
> involved etc make this option less attractive. =46rom an IPV4 space
> depletion perspective as well, it might be feasible if organizations
> having a large block in one region could split it amongst multiple
> regions to prevent Wastage.
>=20
> Any thoughts/expereinces and feedback would be appreciated.
>=20
> Regards,
>=20
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
