nanog mailing list archives

Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations


From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () unix1 bart nl>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 16:50:34 +0100 (MET)

to me and says 'I want to go multihomed with you as a second provider,
currently I have 8 class C's but they are all spread about the
place'. Me 'You need to renumber then esp. as your class C's are
within your current providers aggregate announcments (even though
they are old, and thus technically PI' (there, that's me doing my
bit for aggregation). Them: 'OK, give us a /21 to renumber into, 
you are a local-IR and we aren't'. Currently I have 2 choices as
far as I can make out, give them a bit of my /19, break up my
nice aggregate and ensure loads of extra announcements (and that
probably none of them get routed by anyone applying prefix based
filtering), or give them a new /19 all of their own (you've
said it, that's the minimum size allocation) which actually
solves their problem and mine, but this isn't an option
currently available because currently it's one window per local-IR.
So they have to go and become a local IR.

No they don't. You can ask the RIPE NCC for special PI space to assign to 
this customer. It seems they have a "chemical waste dump" to satisfy 
this kind of requests from.


Current thread: