Re: More ASN collissions

[christian koch <ck () sandcastl es>]

i believe john curran just posted the follow up to the list yesterday on
this matter

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins () arbor net>wrote:

> On Dec 11, 2009, at 1:35 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> > As always, good research by renesys.
>
> What happens when an ASN is requested, and it's discovered that said ASN is
> already in use by an unauthorized network, and that some proportion of the
> Internet are accepting it due to a lack of appropriate routing policy?  Is
> there a process to try and reclaim said ASN via persuasion, or some
> jurisdictionally-appropriate legal action, or peer pressure (pardon the
> pun), or . . . ?
>
> This is a different circumstance than either accidental or deliberate use
> of an already-assigned and -utilized ASN; has this situation occurred in the
> past, and if so, how was it resolved?  If the situation isn't resolved in a
> timely manner, is the ASN in question considered 'poisoned' until a
> resolution is attained, and the next available ASN which isn't being
> utilized in a rogue fashion issued in its place?
>
> Apologies if this is a naive question; I've not run into this particular
> circumstance before, nor have I found any reference to it in any of the
> various list archives.  I do believe that it may become a bit more common,
> given some of the confusion and drama regarding the operationalization of
> 4-byte ASNs.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
>
>    Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.
>
>                        -- H.L. Mencken