Re: Exchange Points and LIRs

[Gert Doering <]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 12:47:24PM +0100, Carlos Friacas wrote:
> > > > My issue is related to the requirement of having 3 members without
> > > > "default:" on their policy.
> > > Ummm.  Where exactly do you see the word "default" in the policy document?
> > OK.  Found it, it's in the *request form*.
> you didnt submit any request for an IXP till today...? :-)

No :-) (while I'm a listed tech-c: for the DECIX LIR, Arnold handled that)

[..]
> > small that you can't manage that, using a /64 from one of the members
> > wouldn't hurt anybody - the DECIX ran on a borrowed IPv4 PA /24 for
> > about 5 years or so, with over 50 members, and without any issues).
> 
> a "hack". an example of what we dont want when we are putting effort in
> designing policies... ;-)

Yes.  But on the other hand, no single policy can catch all special cases,
and you want to have at least *some* definition of IXP...

Still I think that the form is worded in a way that doesn't reflect the
intent of the policy.  Maybe something like "three members that participate
in the global BGP routing with their own globally visible AS" or whatever
like that.  Peering makes sense even without a full BGP table.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  55442  (55636)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster@localhost
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299