Re: [sig-policy] Requests from routing/packeting concerns
> On 17/02/2009, at 2:52 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:
>> This was requested to help in consideration to purchase space (make
>> sure
>> it's not been used by black-listed ISPs), and to help in sorting out
>> filtering problems (explain to peers/upstream).
>>
>
> wow, this is an interesting observation. The thought that a prefix
> once owned by, say, IIJ would be more attractive (and possibly more
> expensive) to buy than a prefix used by the Russian Business Network.
I think the idea is more like making sure not to purchase address space
used by an ISP with bad reputation. Which is likely to be black
listed/gets filtered.
You want to ensure to obtain the space that's routable and reachable, so
it sort of helps to know who had been using it.
In that context, I suppose a space held by an ISP with good reputation
could be considered more attractive if you put it the other way.
>
>> The general feeling was that you have to do the actual testing + be
>> responsible yourself at the end of the day, but information about past
>> holders would still help.
>>
>> Would this be something other operators in the region also find it
>> useful?
>
> Given that APNIC (and all RIRs) maintain that they cannot guarantee
> route-ability of any prefix assigned then I guess a case of buyer
> beware is appropriate. Clearly you don't want to stuck with a 'lemon'
> prefix.
Right. I like the expression "lemon prefix" - gives me a good visual
image of what it's like to get one. thanks for feedback.
izumi