On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:15 PM, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote:
> "We have a contractual relationship with our customer to announce that > space. We have neither a contractual relationship (in this context) with > the RIR nor the RIR's customer. The RIR and/or the RIR's customer should > resolve this issue with our customer." > This is the point at which you really really want to turn the tables and get someone who desires to announce that very provider's own space approaching you, so you "enter a contractual relationship" with that party to do so, since (apparently) according to that provider you don't have an obligation to prevent this. And you have a nice letter from them to prove it to any upstreams, that resource issues are to be resolved with end users. If according to that provider those issues should be resolved between the RIR listed address space holder and the customer directly, (apparently), you are not to be involved in preventing a customer from hijacking theirown assigned prefix. Because the same logic must apply to their very own address space; it is up to them and the RIR to resolve their issue with the elusive end user. But then you realize the only party that could ever approach you with a request to route them another provider's space would be one of those evil spammers.... It as an eye-opening experience. > Regards, > -drc > -- -JH
