Hi Ronald, > Do dues-paying members want to be underwriting the use of bogon ASNs by members whose ASN registrations have lapased due to non-payment of relevant annual fees?
I feel like that is not what we are trying to discuss here and is outside our scope, maybe in the scope of AP-WG. (I don't know if this is in their scope though tbh) So could we please look at data for reserved ASNs (not unallocated ASNs) without trying to argue that any bogon is a bogon. If so we could have a much more productive discussion. -Cynthia On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 10:13 PM Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg < [email protected]> wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, > Hank Nussbacher <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Thanks Ronald, but that doesn't answer my question. I was hoping to see > >route objects which reference *reserved* ASNs - not route objects for > >unallocated ASNs. > > Hank, I'm frankly not sure what the value of such a sub-list would be. > > A bogon ASN is a bogon ASN, no? > > Do dues-paying members want to be underwriting the use of bogon ASNs > by members whose ASN registrations have lapased due to non-payment of > relevant annual fees? > > > Regards, > rfg > >
