About RIPE | Contact  | Search | Sitemap    
Homepage RIPE  
RIPE Community Mail Archives
search  
     
RIPE Navigation Ends
About RIPE Maillists
Maillists Archive
Global Lists
Non Active Lists
RIPE NCC Navigation Ends
Next Section
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: Exchange Points and LIRs

  • From: Aleksi Suhonen < >
  • Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 13:07:14 +0300

Hello,

Quote from Fearghas McKay:
} >TREX is now in a position to start requesting an autonomous system
} >number and IPv4 and IPv6 address space. I originally thought we'd
} >just ask one of the connecting ISPs to forward the requests to RIPE
} >under their LIR, and this is probably what we will end up doing.

} PI space as opposed to PA would help here.

Hmm ... this raises another potential issue: We would like to be
able to host a ccTLD name server and possibly other services that
absolutely require global visibility.

If we request PI space we will get exactly what we ask for. According
to my notes it would be under /20 (but over /22) and thus it might be
really hard to get it visible in every nook and cranny on the Internet.



} >Their situation differs slightly from ours though. They are willing
} >to become LIRs, or they are already LIRs, whereas the number of
} >annual change requests to an IXP's database objects is so small
} >that it won't make sense for a new IXP to become a LIR itself.

} This sounds like an item for the NCC services group to develop
} a new low cost membership for low change LIRs. The Action Plan
} for next year is being formulated just now so it would be a good
} time to suggest it.

Hmm ... maybe, but I could anticipate great resistance toward
such a suggestion, because couldn't it raise the cost of the
bigger membership classes drastically?

I am under the impression that a good portion of the existing
SMALL LIRs have pretty low change frequencies too.



} >Or possibly Euro-IX could operate a LIR for use by its members?

} That might attract the attention of the EU, as it gives an
} appearance of "join the association or you will not get address
} space" which is seen as anti-competitive.

Well ... Carlos already pointed this out too, but the way I see
it is that IXPs would still have all the old options available.
They could become LIRs themselves or they could use someone else's
LIR. And nothing would prevent someone from creating another
European IXP Association.

Euro-IX is not exactly a monopoly on anything. ;-)

--
	Aleksi Suhonen / TREX




  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>
 

Next Section
     About RIPE | Site Map | LIR Portal | About the RIPE NCC | Contact | © RIPE Community. All rights reserved.
RIPE.NET Homepage LIR Portal RIPE Community