Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-27 Thread Dave Sparro

On 6/26/2013 5:11 PM, Adam Greene wrote:

Thanks everyone.

It sounds like (a) customer needs to clarify contract terms with Paetec, and
(b) unless they have an ongoing relationship, the best long-term plan is to
renumber.

I did check reg dates on the blocks, and it is much more recent than the
customer led me to believe (or than I interpreted) ... so I suspect this is
less something which simply dropped off the map and more of an above-board
and possibly ongoing relationship than I suspected. The customer does
provide voice service, so there may be something going on behind the scenes
which makes sense from an authoritative routing perspective.

Thanks for your help. This customer seems to be responsible so I suspect I
may not have all the details and overstated the issue.
And just one more note to complicate things a little more for you. 
Paetec was acquired by Windstream last year.  I hope that doesn't make 
it even harder for you to find answers to your questions from the 
service provider, but I suspect that it will.


--
Dave Sparro



Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-27 Thread Owen DeLong

On Jun 26, 2013, at 4:40 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:

 On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:06:10 -0400, Justin M. Streiner said:
 We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
 mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
 relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
 
 Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk having that space
 reclaimed by Paetec at some point, or is it safe to assume they will
 continue to be able to route trouble-free for years to come?
 
 They should plan to renumber out of that space in the very near future.
 
 This is an excellent time to plan to renumber into 2001:: if they haven't
 such plans already. :)

Well, somewhere in 2000::/3, anyway… It might be somewhere within any of the 
following blocks: 2001:400::/23, 2001:1800::/23, 2001:4800::/23, 2600::/12, or 
2610::/23, 2620::/23.

All of which have been delegated to ARIN by IANA.

As to the PI/PA question… There were PI blocks issued by LIRs (ISPs) in the 
years after the initial implementation of CIDR and before (and possibly for 
some time after) the creation of ARIN. My blocks 192.159.10.0/24 and 
192.124.40.0/23 are examples of such blocks which were originally issued to me 
by Netcom and PSI, respectively. They are now correctly documented as Direct 
Assignments in the ARIN database and covered by LRSA (which I now regret given 
the recent fee restructuring).

Owen





Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Cutler James R
On Jun 26, 2013, at 1:52 PM, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote:
 Hi,
 
 
 
 We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
 mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
 relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago. 
 
 
 
 Is this a common situation?

No data either way.

 Does the customer risk having that space
 reclaimed by Paetec at some point

What does the contract say?

 , or is it safe to assume they will
 continue to be able to route trouble-free for years to come?

It is never save to assume anything, but especially not save to assume 
trouble-free for years to come.

 
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Adam
 





Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Justin M. Streiner

We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.

Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk having that space
reclaimed by Paetec at some point, or is it safe to assume they will
continue to be able to route trouble-free for years to come?


They should plan to renumber out of that space in the very near future.

Even with some sort of formally documented agreement between Paetec and 
the customer that explicitly allows the customer to continue using the 
space after the end of their business relationship, I would guess that 
ARIN's policies take a rather dim view of 'off the books' transfers of 
address space.


This sounds like an administrative oversight on Paetec's part - one that 
Paetec could choose to correct at any time.  It's also not impossible that 
if Paetec forgot about this space, that they could try to assign it to 
another customer, effectively double-booking it, and causing major 
headaches for your customer and whatever customer gets the space.


It's also possible that a post about this to a widely-read mailing list 
could prompt someone from Paetec to look into this more closely ;)


jms



Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Joe Abley

On 2013-06-26, at 13:52, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote:

 We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
 mid-90's

I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4 
space are RIRs and the IANA. If I'm right, what you're talking about is PA 
space, regardless of claims made by your customer or Paetec.


Joe




Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread David Conrad
Joe,

On Jun 26, 2013, at 11:18 AM, Joe Abley jab...@hopcount.ca wrote:
 We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in 
 mid-90's
 I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4 
 space are RIRs and the IANA.

Nope.  Historically, there was no distinction and people could (and did) 
sub-allocate address space with no terms of service indicating the address 
space should ever be returned.  After the establishment of the RIRs and the 
creation of the PI/PA distinction (encouraged with much controversy in the 
CIDR/ALE working group days), there was a concerted effort by the RIRs to move 
towards a lease model.  I believe that effort may have been reflected in RSAs 
at the RIRs, but am too lazy to look it up.  

Regards,
-drc





Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote:
 We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
 mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
 relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.

 Is this a common situation?

It was back in the day. It isn't any more. Most folks doing that have
since renumbered.


 Does the customer risk having that space
 reclaimed by Paetec at some point,

That depends what Paetec has to say about it. Unless the customer has
paperwork to the effect that the assignment outlives the business
relationship (and for how long) then it's entirely up to Paetec staff
today and tomorrow.


 or is it safe to assume they will
 continue to be able to route trouble-free for years to come?

Like all registrants, Paetec is under increasing pressure from ARIN to
justify its ongoing assignments. It is not required to provide
Internet services to your customer, but lack of ongoing contact with
your customer is likely to become an administrative problem for them.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004



Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Jon Lewis

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Justin M. Streiner wrote:


We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.

Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk having that space
reclaimed by Paetec at some point, or is it safe to assume they will
continue to be able to route trouble-free for years to come?


They should plan to renumber out of that space in the very near future.

Even with some sort of formally documented agreement between Paetec and the 
customer that explicitly allows the customer to continue using the space 
after the end of their business relationship, I would guess that ARIN's 
policies take a rather dim view of 'off the books' transfers of address 
space.


It's got to be PA space.  Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.

I used to think similarly, that ARIN members could only assign PA space to 
connectivity customers, but last time I consulted with ARIN about it, I 
was informed this is not the case.  AFAIK, there is nothing stopping any 
provider from acting like an LIR and renting IP space to customers 
whether the customers get connectivity from the provider or not.


Maybe they have Paetec's permission to use the space indefinitely.  Maybe 
it's an oversight in Paetec's turn-down process that the space was never 
reclaimed.


--
 Jon Lewis, MCP :)   |  I route
 |  therefore you are
_ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_



Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread David Conrad
Jon,

On Jun 26, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:
 We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in 
 mid-90's
 They should plan to renumber out of that space in the very near future.

It'd be nice for routing system hygiene, but there probably is no requirement 
(unless there was some contractual language with Paetec).

 I used to think similarly, that ARIN members could only assign PA space to 
 connectivity customers, but last time I consulted with ARIN about it, I was 
 informed this is not the case.  

mid-90's suggests before ARIN.

Regards,
-drc




Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:
 It's got to be PA space.  Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.

No distinction is drawn between PA and PI for ARIN-region address
space assigned prior to ARIN's inception in 1997. That's legacy
address space.

Since the end of filtering on prefixes shorter than /24, PA and PI
have lost most of ther distinction anyway. There's RIR-assigned and
there's LIR assigned. The RIR assignes addresses to LIRs and end
users. The LIR assigns addresses to LIRs and end users. Unless its
IPv6 in which LIRs are strongly discouraged from assigning addresses
to other LIRs and multihomed end users.

Short version: drop PI and PA from the conversation. It makes
absolutely no difference whether the customer thought Paetec assigned
them PI space. The customer's addresses are either directly from ARIN
or they're from Paetec. That's it. If the latter, it's up to Paetec
what the customer can and can't continue to do with them.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004



Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread bmanning

f the assignment predated ARIN, then its not clear if current ARIN policy 
is applicable.


On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 02:18:54PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
 
 On 2013-06-26, at 13:52, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote:
 
  We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
  mid-90's
 
 I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4 
 space are RIRs and the IANA. If I'm right, what you're talking about is PA 
 space, regardless of claims made by your customer or Paetec.
 
 
 Joe
 
 



RE: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Adam Greene
Thanks everyone.

It sounds like (a) customer needs to clarify contract terms with Paetec, and
(b) unless they have an ongoing relationship, the best long-term plan is to
renumber. 

I did check reg dates on the blocks, and it is much more recent than the
customer led me to believe (or than I interpreted) ... so I suspect this is
less something which simply dropped off the map and more of an above-board
and possibly ongoing relationship than I suspected. The customer does
provide voice service, so there may be something going on behind the scenes
which makes sense from an authoritative routing perspective. 

Thanks for your help. This customer seems to be responsible so I suspect I
may not have all the details and overstated the issue.

-Original Message-
From: bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com [mailto:bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 3:45 PM
To: Joe Abley
Cc: Adam Greene; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Paetec PI space?


f the assignment predated ARIN, then its not clear if current ARIN policy is
applicable.


On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 02:18:54PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
 
 On 2013-06-26, at 13:52, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote:
 
  We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
  mid-90's
 
 I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4
space are RIRs and the IANA. If I'm right, what you're talking about is PA
space, regardless of claims made by your customer or Paetec.
 
 
 Joe
 
 




Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Jon Lewis

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:


On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:

It's got to be PA space.  Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.


No distinction is drawn between PA and PI for ARIN-region address
space assigned prior to ARIN's inception in 1997. That's legacy
address space.

Since the end of filtering on prefixes shorter than /24, PA and PI
have lost most of ther distinction anyway. There's RIR-assigned and


The distinction to me is that PA space is provider owned space assigned to 
a customer.


PI space is your space, whether assigned by ARIN or legacy space 
handed out by Internic or whoever was handing out space at the given 
pre-RIR time.  It's yours to use with whatever provider you want.


PA space generally can't be taken with you if you leave the 
provider...though it's not unusual to be given some amount of time to 
renumber.


IME, it would be unusual, even for pre-RIR space, for a provider to assign 
space to a customer and not expect to reclaim that space when the customer 
terminates service.  At the same time, it wouldn't be unusual, 
particularly for very large or very people/clue deficient providers to 
just never bother reclaiming space.  In such a case, I'd say it still is 
their space...they just haven't done the housekeeping to realize that the 
space should be back in their pool of assignable blocks.


--
 Jon Lewis, MCP :)   |  I route
 |  therefore you are
_ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_



Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:06:10 -0400, Justin M. Streiner said:
  We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
  mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
  relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
 
  Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk having that space
  reclaimed by Paetec at some point, or is it safe to assume they will
  continue to be able to route trouble-free for years to come?

 They should plan to renumber out of that space in the very near future.

This is an excellent time to plan to renumber into 2001:: if they haven't
such plans already. :)


pgpEgsZlv1f9w.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Paetec PI space?

2013-06-26 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:
 On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:

 It's got to be PA space.  Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.


 No distinction is drawn between PA and PI for ARIN-region address
 space assigned prior to ARIN's inception in 1997. That's legacy
 address space.

 Since the end of filtering on prefixes shorter than /24, PA and PI
 have lost most of ther distinction anyway. There's RIR-assigned and

 The distinction to me is that PA space is provider owned space assigned to a
 customer.

Hi Jon,

If the space was assigned after ARIN's inception then it's no more
owned by the service provider than by the end user. If the ARIN
contract you signed was clear on nothing else, it was clear about
that.

You are correct, however, that the Local Internet Registry (LIR, aka
ISP) may set additional rules for the address' use beyond those rules
ARIN sets. In the ARIN region (this is less clear cut in other
regions) one of the common rules the LIR sets is that you can't keep
the addresses when you cease to buy a compatible product from the LIR.
However, and this is important, the LIR has complete discretion in
adding that rule. ARIN in no way requires it.

So it isn't PA or PI... it's just a heirarchy of registries, each of
which adds rules.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004