Hi Bill,
Bill Manning <bmanning(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU> wrote:
[...]
Leo, this is the text we use for IX delegations. For CI uses, transit of
said prefix is a valid injection.
--------------------------------------------------
Exchange Point Announcement Statement
Our statement regarding the injection of EP.NET address space into a routing
system.
"anyone who has a properly delegated /32 address delegated/assigned from a /24
within 198.32.0.0/16 may announce that /24 to their peers. This is also true
in IPv6 space in that anyone with a properly delegated /64 assigned from a /48
in the 2001:0478::/32 space may annouce that /48 to their peers. Prefix
aggregates are discouraged and as a general rule may be considered to be proxy
aggregations made by parties who are not direct participants in any address
assignments from these ranges."
As a general rule we try to avoid statements that might give people the
impression we are telling them what they may and may not route. In
another paragraph in the "Smallest RIPE NCC Allocation / Assignment
Sizes" document we write:
"Routing decisions for blocks of address space are the sole
responsibility of network operators. However, network operators taking
routing decisions based on prefix length are requested and encouraged to
route at least blocks of sizes corresponding to the 'smallest
allocation' and larger."
Regards,
--
leo vegoda
RIPE NCC
Registration Services Manager