28 Jul
2021
28 Jul
'21
4:31 p.m.
On 28 Jul 2021, at 10:08, Antonios Chariton (daknob)
via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
Just to add to Antonis’ reply - I am standing by to receive new requests from anyone that
has an existing BGP authorised allocation within 44.128/10 and I will expedite the issuing
of new prefixes and the LOA for anyone having to renumber, we are also quite happy for you
to have the two allocations side by side for a period of time to help in the renumbering
process.
73,
Chris - G1FEF
On 28 Jul 2021, at 09:35, Tony Langdon via 44Net
<44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
An issue I see here is that 44.190/16 was allocated to networks with no
specific geographic location, and was/is intended for Internet facing
services. A number of us (including myself) have space in here that is
BGP announced (I'd say the majority, if not all the allocations here are
BGP announced). What's going to happen with that space? Renumbering a
BGP announced space is going to be highly disruptive, and for some
services that require geolocation (e.g. Echolink proxies), there will be
longer term anomalies in operation, while the geolocation databases are
updated.
Hello Tony, thank you very much for your e-mail!
Indeed, some users will have to renumber under the proposed scheme. This is why we
included the statement to the Board that they will support these users in doing so. As a
side-note, most of the TAC will have to renumber to some degree and ARDC will have to
renumber its infrastructure as well.