Hi Andrea, In general I agree to the idea of recycling the returned AS numbers. I also think that the contacts of referenced AS numbers in the database, should be contacted (probably multiple times as Randy suggested) and in the end, fix it in the database if nothing is fixed. The idea of cleaning the RIPE db is noble and we should do that, however there are also other locations where those AS numbers are referenced.. ( PeeringDB or RADB comes to mind..) Are we going to provide them with the list of current returned AS numbers to make sure they can also do their housekeeping ? Regards, Erik Bais -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Andrea Cima Sent: dinsdag 25 juni 2013 15:02 To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Cc: db-wg@ripe.net Subject: [address-policy-wg] Guidance Requested: Reassigning Referenced ASNs [Apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, At the Address Policy WG session during RIPE 66, the RIPE NCC requested guidance from the RIPE community on reassigning referenced 16-bit ASNs. Together with the Address Policy WG Chairs, we have decided to seek additional input from the WG mailing list. Background: the RIPE NCC has around 1,400 returned 16-bit ASNs that are currently referenced in route objects, and "import" and "export" lines in aut-num objects. Problem: there is a need for 16-bit ASNs by operators. However, because these ASNs are referenced, they are not being reassigned. At RIPE 66, the RIPE NCC suggested the following potential solutions: A. Not reassign referenced AS numbers B. Reassign AS numbers even if referenced C. Clean up the RIPE Database from references and then reassign the AS numbers C.1. "Silent" update; or C.2. Informing the object holder of the update Please find the RIPE Meeting slides at the following url: https://ripe66.ripe.net/presentations/176-Address_Policy_WG_RIPE_66.pdf This email has been sent to both the Address Policy WG and RIPE Database WG mailing lists, due to the impact the proposals would have on the RIPE Database. However, we would ask to keep the discussion on the Address Policy WG mailing list to facilitate participation and the channeling of feedback. Thank you in advance for your input and best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC