[48674] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Error in assignments....?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kurt Erik Lindqvist)
Wed Jun 12 05:03:38 2002
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 11:02:59 +0200
From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>
To: "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@opaltelecom.co.uk>,
Sabri Berisha <sabri@cluecentral.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0206112156050.755-100000@staff.opaltelecom.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
...exactly. So, again, I can't see a valid reason for a single route to
originate from two different AS:es. Unless for transition purposes as was
mentioned.
- kurtis -
--On Tuesday, June 11, 2002 9:58 PM +0100 "Stephen J. Wilcox"
<steve@opaltelecom.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I'm not familiar with all the RIR policies but RIPE is very
> straightforward, if you want an ASN you have to be multihomed. I cant see
> any logic why another RIR would be different in its approach...
>
> In my experience its far easier to get an ASN from RIPE than an IP
> assignment approved. For the latter you need to prove all kinds of things
> as to why you need it, for an ASN all you have to do is prove you have two
> upstream ISPs and nothing more!
>
> Steve
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Sabri Berisha wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
>>
>> > Ugh, this is why ASN's exist and is why ppl have been posting about
>> > inconsistent BGP announcements of late
>> >
>> > If you originate the same block from 2 ASNs then you no longer have a
>> > single administrative area and need a 3rd ASN as per the RFC.
>>
>> And if your regional registry refuses to assign an ASN you are cooked and
>> you will probably end up using a solution like this. I'm not saying its
>> good, I'm saying its bad, but unfortunately common practice.
>>
>>
>
