North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Ettiquette and rules regarding Hijacked ASN's or IP space?
On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Michel Py wrote: > Chris, > > > Christopher L. Morrow wrote: > > excellent point :) the distinction between 'good' and 'bad' was > > just non-abuser/abuser. Certianly ARIN's requirements for ASN > > ownership are simple enough, be multihomed and have a 'unique' > > routing policy. If you need an ASN likely you are already > > multihomed and have a 'unique' routing policy, eh? > > Yep. > > > > If you fuzz over the 'bad'/'good' beyond 'abuser'/'non-abuser' > > then perhaps there isn't a distinction. Perhaps clarification: > > Someone that sets up an ISP and hijacks ASN/ip-blocks > > specifically to abuse versus someone who hijacked an ASN to > > avoid paperwork. > > I'm not buying into this "avoid paperwork" thing. I can't speak for > RIPE, APNIC or LACNIC, but in the ARIN region I have requested ASNs both > for myself and helped customers request theirs and it's not that big of > a deal. Note that I didn't say it was a 'good' reason, just a reason... that or 'status' to have an ASN below number N (like say 10,000??) not that it matters to the routing system WHAT your ASN might be, just that one exists... > > There is no real money incentive either: if one is setting up a real > ISP, a one-time $500 fee is a) part of the cost of doing business and b) > well worth the money compared to be labeled as a hijacker. > indeed... some people are shortsighted perhaps? Again, I don't understand the mentality so I can't argue for it... > Save for network engineers that have snagged an ASN from a merge and > recycled it for their home network or pet project (there are none on > this list, of course), would you mind giving some specifics about 'good > guys' that have hijacked an ASN? |