IP renumbering timeframe

Daniel Golding dgolding at sockeye.com
Mon May 6 18:49:04 UTC 2002


Pressure from Cogent? I'm not sure Cogent had to apply any pressure to
Peer1. Cogent could simply have null routed small aggregates of the block,
rendering it useless. i.e. /24s of the /22 all static routed to one of their
loopback addresses, then redistributed into BGP and sent on to their peers.
By contacting Peer1, they actually did you something of a favor, as they
allowed you to gracefully stop advertising the block, rather than null
routing you.

Of course, the amount of time you have to renumber, should it prove
necessary, should be specified in the Terms and Conditions of your transit
contract. If you feel wronged, you can file suit against Cogent. ARIN can
publish guidelines about what others should do, and they can specify
policies that govern their interaction with specific organizations, but they
don't have the kind of authority to do what you are looking for.

I suppose the moral of the story is, if you get into a billing dispute with
an upstream, be cognizant of what's on the line, including issues like IP
space, circuit term liability, etc.

- Daniel Golding

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu]On Behalf Of
> Ralph Doncaster
> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 1:19 AM
> To: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: IP renumbering timeframe
>
>
>
> We entered into a contract with Cogent for service, and were assigned a
> /22 for our use.  This reassignment was listed in Cogent's rwhois server
> (they don't SWIP).  They also gave written permission to another transit
> provider (Peer1) to accept our BGP announcements for the /22.  We have
> been announcing them to our Peer1 and over a dozen peers for a few months
> now.  After paying Cogent $11K, a billing dispute developed.  On Friday
> May 3 we terminated our service with Cogent, and on May 5 Cogent contacted
> our main internet connection provder to stop routing these IPs. Cogent did
> not contact us first.  There is still an RADB entry for this block with
> our AS21936 as the origin.  Under pressure from Cogent Peer1 complied,
> though I think I have them convinced that a few hours notice on a Sunday
> evg is not a reasonable amount of time to renumber from a /22.
>
> What is the generally accpted timeframe for renumbering?  My reading of
> ARIN policy would seem to imply at least 30 days.
>
> Ralph Doncaster
> principal, IStop.com
> div. of Doncaster Consulting Inc.
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list