Re: Exchange Points and LIRs

[Gert Doering <]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 12:58:39PM +0100, Fearghas McKay wrote:
> At 13:51 +0200 10/7/03, Gert Doering wrote:
> >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.
> 
> However the agreed policy definition did not refer to BGP, globally visible
> AS and those issues were never raised during the discussions.
> 
> As such the form should be tweaked to reflect policy rather than the other
> way round.

That's about what I wanted to say :-) - the usual counter argument is
"but how do we know that those entities are ISPs" - and I think tacking that
to "have a global unique AS number" would be a reasonable compromise.

(If *all* participants at an IXP insist on peering with private ASns,
then I'd consider that a very specific corner case that I'm not going
to worry about)

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