On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 02:00 +0100, Andy Davidson wrote:
Max Tulyev wrote:
This story is about PA/LIR, where (again, in the theory) all is quite simply. No money -> closing contarct (as in terms of it) -> getting back IPs.
You're opening up a huge can of worms here. 'Getting back IPs' means contacting peers and upstreams and telling these parties to stop accepting the announcement from the non-paying company. If the company is still paying bills to their upstreams, do you think upstreams will take kindly to this action ?
What the immediate upstream may think would be irrelevant. *If* there is *ever* consensus within the RIPE community to have the NCC reclaim blocks, there would have to be mechanisms in place to enforce the decision. That would most probably involve a quarantine period for reclaimed prefixes during which transit providers in the region would be asked to black-hole the space.
The RIPE NCC deleting the inetnum object doesn't mean the addresses stop routing ...
It only takes a handful of large transit providers to black-hole a prefix to render that address-block useless.
RIPE NCC possibly have no contract with the companies that would need to stop accepting the prefixes from the debting party.
There are more than enough transit-providers on contract. The immediate upstream of the reclaimed block alone makes no difference. The question isn't if it can be done or not, but whether the RIPE community as a whole really wants such a scheme to be implemented. -- Per Heldal - http://heldal.eml.cc/