Re: Charging for IPs

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

Since the context here is “charging for a /31 for bgp”, I presumed we were talking point to point private peering. 

Owen


> On Sep 5, 2026, at 23:08, Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 6 Sept 2026 at 07:04, Owen DeLong via NANOG
> <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
>
> > Of course that only applies to routes where the NLRI is the adjacent advertising router.
>
> I don't think RFC makes any such restriction, just like IPv4 NH on
> IPv4 prefix, eBGP would allow it to be any on-link, and iBGP wouldn't
> care at all.
>
> But you should be resetting next-hop in IXP already to the peer
> address, so that traffic isn't driven to other networks.
> --
>  ++ytti
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/IDVIJ6QTCCW2KNINUVKSUQNQ7XFPXEOV/