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

[Mike Burns]

Hi Rubens,

Well I don't think we disagree on proper due diligence for any lessee or
lessor, and like anything else you shouldn't just believe the person selling
you something! Agreed.

Your pet-project investigations sound like a good idea.
Will you please reveal the results of your investigations here for others to
learn from?

As you say, it’s a simple matter of comparing ASN advertisements to the
block ownership being advertised, and then check to see if the block being
advertised by the foreign ASN is legacy. Pretty simple and I think that may
convince you. 

You may also read the threads from the ARIN ppml I posted earlier to hear
feedback on this precise issue from many others, not just me. Kind of like
the due diligence you have advised, use multiple sources.

Of course we know that many cloud providers advertise blocks belonging to
their clients, not themselves, and they advertise them under the cloud
provider's ASN.  AWS, Cogent, Oracle, Vultr, etc. Not sure how you would
differentiate those from leases, but with enough investigation you are sure
to find smaller, non-cloud provider ASNs advertising space belonging to
others.

If you would agree to non-disclosure I will share an ARIN non-legacy block
being leased by a Latin American client off list as I believe I can acquire
their permission. They know they are breaking no rules leasing ARIN RSA
space.

You still say non-legacy space is not safely leasable, but you can't point
to any policy or RSA language that prevents RSA addresses from being leased.
Only in LACNIC and AFRINIC is there a risk, not that I've ever heard of
LACNIC addresses revoked for usage differing from the original
justification. Maybe you have? 

If what you say is true (that non-legacy space can't be leased), where is it
in the RSA or the NRPM of ARIN, RIPE, or APNIC?

Looking forward to your pet-project results.

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: LACNOG <lacnog-bounces en lacnic.net> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2022 1:16 PM
To: Latin America and Caribbean Region Network Operators Group
<lacnog en lacnic.net>
Subject: Re: [lacnog]
        Subasignación de prefijos a
otro ASN y el tema con los RoA

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
_______________________________________________
LACNOG mailing list
LACNOG en lacnic.net
https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog