Re: [nanog] 2749 routes AT RISK - Re: TIMELY/IMPORTANT - Approximately 40

[Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

> On Apr 4, 2022, at 17:40 , John Curran <jcurran () istaff org> wrote:
>
>
> > On 4 Apr 2022, at 7:42 PM, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) <danm () prime gushi org <mailto:danm () prime gushi org>> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 5 Apr 2022, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
> >
> > > I think all of us recognize a need to declaw "third party" IRR databases
> > > like RADB and ALTDB ("declawing" meaning that it is not desirable that
> > > anyone can just register *anything*); on the other hand our community
> > > also has to be cognizant about there being parts of the Internet which
> > > are not squatting on anyone's numbers *and* also are not contracted to a
> > > specific RIR.
> >
> > As one datapoint, two tiny /24's I (not-dayjob) originate are legacy resources.  They cannot be added to either RPKI 
> > or the ARIN IRR objects without endeavoring to spend an at-least-this-much-money-price-will-only-go-up-over-time 
> > amount.
>
> Dan - 
>
> I’ve frequently spoken with people with legacy resources in this situation, and some opt to sign an RSA & become an 
> ARIN customer, and others do not…   It’s your choice, and those with concerns about the NONAUTH RIR shutdown who 
> didn't want to become ARIN customers and use our authenticated IRR were directed towards several of the other 
> perfectly fine IRR projects out there (e.g. RADB, ALTDB, etc.)  

If you want to preserve your rights and not get sucked into the ARIN fee circus, I highly recommend transferring your 
legacy resources to RIPE-NCC.

A cheap VM with BGP in RIPE-Land during the transfer process is all that is really required to create sufficient nexus 
of presence in the region.

> There’s nothing amiss with putting routing objects in these other IRR systems, and no one I spoke with had any 
> challenge with the concept.  As far going with the RPKI ROA route, I’ll admit that I didn’t raise it very much (since 
> it inherently requires a level of validation that many organizations don’t particularly want or need to go through 
> with their legacy number resources...) 

ALT-DB is a free IRR that you can use easily and basically clone your data from the old ARIN IRR if necessary.

> > Ironically, to find the way forward, ARIN would require incorporation, the signing of a RSA, and Moar Money for this 
> > same organization to have similar v6 blocks, in order to eventually retire these v4 resources.
>
> Interesting – as ARIN’s fee schedule was designed specifically so that every IPv4 customer can get a 
> corresponding-sized IPv6 block without any change in annual registry fees.
> (i.e. I’d be interested in hearing more; on- or off- list as you prefer)   If you mean that you’d need to pay the 
> same amount of fees of everyone else whose received similar sized IPv6 blocks, then yes, I am afraid this is the 
> case. 

Not exactly true… Any IPv4 customer with an LRSA does not have this option because you can’t put your v6 resources on 
your LRSA and if you have two accounts (whether you created a second account or whether ARIN
split your accounts without some much as asking you if that was desired), they get charged each and no possibility for 
the fee calculation you describe exists.

As such, your claim here, especially in the context of a discussion of legacy resources is a bit disingenuous and we’ve 
discussed it enough times that you cannot claim to be unaware of this fact.

Owen