On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:19:03PM +0000, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
Over here, a lease implies that it's RIPE NCC's job to make sure that the prefix is and remains in usable shape for its intended purpose (globally routeable, not blacklisted etc.).
does RIPE NCC -really- provide assurance that a prefix it hands out is globally routable?
Quite the opposite. I think all the RIRs have a consistent stance here: "caveat emptor". (Well, not "emptor" because they claim one does not buy address space, but I think I've discussed that...) OTOH, in my experience the RIRs do *care* about their members' problems. They do help people who are getting filtered inappropriately with efforts to get filters removed. And the RIPE NCC runs the "de-bogonising" effort: http://www.ris.ripe.net/debogon/ I think this is all as it should be. On the Internet, we find that if you place the cost and the benefit at the same place, things get solved. So the LIR that gets the space must "clean up" the space (cost), but then can use it for whatever cool Internet things it wants (benefit). Having the RIRs take responsibility breaks the cost/benefit connection, so they will spend more than some LIR need, and less than others on the effort. -- Shane