On Mar 6, 2012, at 1:09 PM, Brian Kantor wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 12:37:24PM -0800, Tim Osburn
wrote:
Brian and All,
I always thought it was a waste of a routable /8 to not have it
routed on the Internet, otherwise why are people just not using IANA
space instead? However, if it is to be routed on the internet I think
some ground rules must be established of what is and is not
acceptable and penalties for not following the rules and established
guidelines.
I imagine we'll have to have rules and some sort of binding agreement/contract.
Agreed. What organization would the regional orgs contract to? Is there an org that
"holds" the 44/8 space?
Additionally,
and I bring this up again, a RWHOIS server should/must
be used (tied in with ARIN on the 44/8 allocation) so that people can
query specific address space that will return the contact/owner of
whatever space is being advertised for whatever reason. Additionally,
IRR entries should also be required for anyone wanting to advertise
space via BGP. Those should be some common sence polices that need to
be followed at the very minimum.
Yes, we'd have to do that, and that brings up the issue of who is to
do this - I'm willing but I'm running out of time to do these sorts
of things. We're going to need volunteers to run the rwhois server,
to keep the data up to date, to update the IRR entries, and so on.
This is going to be a big commitment if we decide to do it. In an all
volunteer organization, how will we do what needs to be done?
- Brian
I would be happy to host a server and help on this. Perhaps a conference call to brain
storm this a bit and document issues and actions?
Tim