[lacnog]         Subasignación de prefijos a otro ASN y el tema con los RoA

[Rubens Kuhl]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:50 PM Mike Burns <mike en iptrading.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rubens,
>
> I'm going to ignore the childish ad hominem.

Not ad hominem, apply to all brokers, not just you. The same with the
pet project I will now start to identify all RIR leases that are not
kosher, not just your clients.


> My facts stand, yours were proven incorrect.
> You were the one saying only legacy addresses can be leased. Still standing
> by that one?

Still standing by that one, and they were not proven incorrect by
anything in this thread.
You not published the lease list also didn't help make a point either
way, but that will be solved soon enough by some processing of RIR
delegated lists and DFZ BGP announcements.


> You won't point to any policy or RSA that prevents leasing and you ignore
> the many lease providers operating today.

You assume those lease providers are operating correctly, something I
don't. I also don't assume they are operating incorrectly, and every
step of the way I mentioned that each allocation is unique in its
ability to be a part of a lease or not.


> My facts are:
>  that only LACNIC and AFRINIC registered blocks pose any risk at all due to
> RSA language

It's good that someone reckons this, because sometimes (not you) I
read otherwiser.

>  non-legacy space is leasable safely

That's where we differ.

>  leasing with ROA is being done today and I  am the only one who answered
> the OP correctly on his question.

I also mentioned that about ROA, so you keep getting facts wrong even
when they are fresh.


Rubens