In message <[email protected]>,
Edward Shryane <[email protected]> wrote:
>* The maintainer can ask to make an exception, not to delete a {bogon}
>route(6) object.
OK. I'll bite. Why?
>* Otherwise, after a further 2 weeks, delete the route(6) objects.
Wait a minute. So for periods up to two full weeks, RIPE NCC will
support and facilitate the use of bogon IP address space??
Somebody is going to need to explain to me the wisdom of that.
>Note for now, the AS origin status is *not* considered. Please discuss
>further whether this should be included.
Maybe you missed it. I have raised this point multiple times here on
this mailing list, i.e. the issue of eliminating those route objects
that make refernece to bogon AS numbers from the data base, and each
time there was an outpouring of unbridled enthusiasm. So what's the
hold up?
Eliminating the route objects that referred to bogon IP address
space was a GOOD and a NECESSARY thing, but failing to also eliminate
from the data base all of the (mostly ancient and abandoned) route
objects that refer to bogon ASNs makes about as much sense as using
a colander as a condom.
Regards,
rfg
