[lir-wg] AS Number Policy
Christopher Sharp ripe-lir-wg at chriss.net
Wed Jul 10 00:08:40 CEST 2002
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 00:17:20 +0300 (IDT), Hank Nussbacher <hank at att.net.il> wrote: >The problem I foresee will be removing an ASN. RIPE has a policy of not >changing mntner objects or overriding them so if the ASN just ignores >RIPEs emails and continues to use the ASN - then what? I agree. However, I think the community is agreed that an AS return policy is needed. What that policy is and how it is implemented is going to be the harder question to answer. For new applicants I believe 3 months should be enough to bring their new AS on-line. It should also be soon enough after the initial registration to guarantee having accurate contact details for the applicant (either from the registration or via the LIR through which it was submitted). Contact will be a lot harder with older registrations. The LIRs through which such applications were made often no-longer have contact with the maintainers. Contacting the maintainers of long-unused ASNs will be problematic. I imagine a large percentage of registrants will simply no-longer exist and their contacts will have moved on. I believe a general RIPE policy is needed to cover all unused registrations where the registrant no-longer exists - or have I missed something? The sooner RIPE contacts the mntner of an AS after it appears to become unused the better the chances of making contact and a successful return of the ASN. This is why I back a short period of disuse before the mntner is contacted requesting return of the ASN. I think we will see a pattern of depreciating contactability for those whose ASN is in use but no-longer multi-homed. Many of these registrants are in the process of down-sizing and have no strong technical focus. This means registered mntners are less likely to be available as time goes on and there may be no skilled replacement contact available. Early communication with such registrants will be critical in negotiating the return of their unused AS. For this reason I suggest a 6 month period before contact is made, followed by a 3 month period for "migration" from the single-homed AS. I agree with Neil [apologies if it was not you] that there should be a long period before a returned AS is released. The question of what is to be done when no mntner can be contacted for an apparently disused object is a much larger problem to address and is not specific to ASNs. >And even if RIPE manages to have a procedure for removing an ASN against >the will of the organization it was allocated to, what is to stop the >organization to continue to use it? Whilst this is a very valid point I hope registrants like these are in the minority. The refusal of a few members to observe protocol is not a reason not to define a policy and attempt to enforce it. I suspect that many of the single-homed AS in use still have a relationship with the LIR through which the application was made, in which case pressure could be brought to bear with the LIR to assist. Ultimately the community will decide if they feel strongly enough to bring such offenders to justice. This is likely to take the form of bogon filters. C.
[ lir-wg Archives ]