On Jul 2, 2026, at 20:59, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
Can you give the list some concrete examples of these deployment models that cause tension with the current end-site definition and/or interpretation?
PD gone wild
e.g. if <broadband provider> PDs me a /56 and i split it out to neighbors
Ok, I'll bite :) Our current end-site definition: 2.9. End Site An End Site is defined as the location of an End User (subscriber) who has a business or legal relationship (same or associated entities) with a service provider that involves:- - that service provider assigning address space to the End User location - that service provider providing transit service for the End User location to other sites - that service provider carrying the End User's location traffic - that service provider advertising an aggregate prefix route that contains the End User's location assignment Even if the deployment model that you describe happens, I think it would be pretty rare: You could be considered a service provider if we stretch the concept a little bit. And if we apply the definition to that, we get: - You could argue that you're assigning address space to your neighbors, although it would be a sub-assignment, which is problematic. - You are providing transit to your neighbors - You are carrying your neighbors' location traffic So far so good, but: - There has to be a legal or business relationship between you and your neighbors. I'm not sure if "we're all buddies here" would qualify as such. - Given that your ISP PDs you the /56 I would say there is no BGP or anything like that involved, so you would not be advertising an aggregate prefix. So I would argue that under the current definition and the scenario you describe, your neighbors would not qualify as end-sites. And they shouldn't until you get your act together and set up a proper service provider with ASN, peering, LIR account, etc :) So I don't see much tension here. Cheers, Alex Wearing his Random Internet Nerd hat