Mon Feb 5 12:03:46 CET 2001
>As far as I know, there are two feasible cases: > >1. The customer MOVES from one ISP to another >2. The customer connects to ANOTHER ISP, while using the other ISP Hi, Many Thanks for all comments. The case I meant was exactly the 2nd one. Customer has an old connectivity to LIR-1 and have got a new connection from LIR-2. >2 is usually performed either by the use of BGP or by the use of static >asymmetric routing, or RADWare's LinkProof. That's the case. >In the 2nd case, the reason here is usually high availability and/or load >balancing between links/ISPs. In this situation, the customer NEEDS both the >assignments. In this case, what should people at LIR-1 Do? Can they ask LIR-2 people to stop forcing customers? And if the answer is positive, What's the rule, if LIR-2 people continue to behave like that? >I believe that 'legal', a LIR cannot just 'demand' that a customer would >return their previously-assigned IPs unless there's a reason (i.e., the >situation is case #1). It might be that that specific LIR is having problems >with its AW (let's say their AW is 256 ips, and the customer already has >IPs, it might be that the 'new' LIR needs to send a RIPE-141 to RIPE - and >they might be too lazy to do that). I agree. Another possiblity is that LIR-2's people are trying to fulfill their own test period ( according to RIPE NCC slow starting ) and somehow attack to LIR-1 reputation. Kind Regards, IPM LOCAL REGISTRY, Tehran-Iran Saeed.
[ lir-wg Archive ]