[79993] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Service providers that NAT their whole network?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Vest)
Tue Apr 19 22:36:43 2005
In-Reply-To: <bb0e440a05041919246ea30d8f@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>,
Philip Matthews <matthews@nimcatnetworks.com>, nanog@merit.edu
From: Tom Vest <tvest@pch.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:36:01 -0400
To: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Apr 19, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 4/20/05, Tom Vest <tvest@pch.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 19, 2005, at 5:25 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>>> That makes very little sense to me since the smaller providers can
>>> get
>>> a /22 directly from ARIN.
>>
>> Sometimes resources that come from a regional registry are not
>> welcomed by a national operator. This can go for AS numbers as well as
>> addresses. And sometimes a national operator is the only way out.
>
> Not welcomed as in, filtered out / these providers refuse to route
> them?
> Or do they kick up a fuss on the lines of "you should approach only
> me, or failing that the LIR, for IPs, don't let me catch you running
> to the RIR next time"
As in, sometimes national operators will decline to speak bgp to
(topologically) subnational operators, so that even when they present
themselves with a regionally allocated public ASN and address space,
these will not be accepted. I am not at liberty to identify specific
cases, but if you look at recent-ish (RIR-era) ASN allocations that
have never appeared in the routing table, you will come across (n)
networks that fit this description.
Another reason to approach with caution proposals to cede greater
registry-like authority to national PTOs and regulatory authorities,
IMHO.
TV
