You forgot the other one - expense. AFAIK all of the registries have fees
or require you to be a customer. If there is no operational value for me
why would I want to spend the money? I realize most of you work for
companies that consider a million dollars chump change but that is not the
Mark Radabaugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
You forgot the other one - expense. AFAIK all of the registries have fees
or require you to be a customer. If there is no operational value for me
why would I want to spend the money? I realize most of you work for
companies that consider a
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Joe Abley [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who uses RADB? [was BGP to doom us all]
--- Joe Abley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Generating route filters from the IRR via a small
lump of script has
the potential to be cheaper, quicker, more efficient
I'm thrilled to hear that that project is being picked
up again. The long-term benefits (IMO) are worth the
non-trivial amount of effort required to make a
functioning solution.
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very subtle, David. As it happens, somebody asked
only last week if
they could take
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very subtle, David. As it happens, somebody asked only last week if
they could take up the project again. For those who think mapping
filters to route objects is nigh trivial, there is a significant
difference between network assignees and routes.
RADB? [was BGP to doom us all]
Who actually uses RADB to build filters other than Verio? While my
experience with other providers is limited Verio is the only one (of the
ones we have used) who used RADB entries for BGP peers.
Level3 do atleast. Most European providers do
Yes, at iMCI (we) had our own registry, MCI-RR, but we only used it
(in addition to data from the other IRRs) to generate customer prefix
filters, not peers.
Cable Wireless still uses the RR, now know as CW-RR.
-danny
As I remember and I could be wrong, its been a few years now, when I
:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who uses RADB? [was BGP to doom us all]
Yes, at iMCI (we) had our own registry, MCI-RR, but we only used it
(in addition to data from the other IRRs) to generate customer prefix
filters, not peers.
Cable Wireless still uses the RR, now know as CW-RR
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 11:28 America/Vancouver, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It doesnt cost a million dollars to have access to a RR, its somewhat
less! You
pay for your domains you pay for your IPs you pay for your ASN you
pay for your
SSL, so why be shocked you pay a little for this too?
On Sunday, Mar 2, 2003, at 14:06 America/Vancouver, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It doesnt cost a million dollars to have access to a RR, its
somewhat
less! You pay for your domains you pay for your IPs you pay for your
ASN you pay for your SSL, so why be shocked you pay a little for
this
too?
--- Joe Abley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Generating route filters from the IRR via a small
lump of script has
the potential to be cheaper, quicker, more efficient
and less
customer-enraging than the common alternative
approach of opening six
different tickets with the NOC and sacrificing
No, the lazy operational implementations of how people deploy BGP
in their networks will be the downfall of the Internet. I see on a daily
basis, wrong announcements, route leaks tripping max-prefixes, RADB
entries that are either totally out of date, completely wrong or
for some large
Who actually uses RADB to build filters other than Verio? While my
experience with other providers is limited Verio is the only one (of the
ones we have used) who used RADB entries for BGP peers.
Level3 do atleast. Most European providers do.
Neil.
Who actually uses RADB to build filters other than Verio? While my
experience with other providers is limited Verio is the only one (of the
ones we have used) who used RADB entries for BGP peers.
Level3 do atleast. Most European providers do.
For customers, though not inter-provider.
as you say for customers only. Inter-provider we have basic bogon checking plus
maximum prefix. Its too unwieldy to build when you have peers exchanging
thousands of routes... theres a belief that the peer should be behaving
responsibly tho and this is a condition of most bilateral
So, let's recap why no one uses them (as many have said already in the
related
thread): Laziness. The same laziness that results in the slew of other
things
many folks have pointed out not being addressed.
-danny
You forgot the other one - expense. AFAIK all of the registries have fees
On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
So, let's recap why no one uses them (as many have said already in the
related
thread): Laziness. The same laziness that results in the slew of other
things
many folks have pointed out not being addressed.
-danny
You forgot the other one
You forgot the other one - expense. AFAIK all of the registries have fees
or require you to be a customer. If there is no operational value
First problem, you see no operational value.
for me why would I want to spend the money?
Money changing hands no longer makes the IRR a
It doesnt cost a million dollars to have access to a RR, its somewhat
less! You
pay for your domains you pay for your IPs you pay for your ASN you pay for
your
SSL, so why be shocked you pay a little for this too? And if everyone
filters
your prefixes that will be operational value enough to
On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
Who actually uses RADB to build filters other than Verio? While my
experience with other providers is limited Verio is the only one (of the
ones we have used) who used RADB entries for BGP peers.
AFAIK, Level3 and CW. I have to keep RADB entries
It doesnt cost a million dollars to have access to a RR, its somewhat less! You
pay for your domains you pay for your IPs you pay for your ASN you pay for your
SSL, so why be shocked you pay a little for this too? And if everyone filters
your prefixes that will be operational value enough to
On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 10:20:43AM -0500, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
This is not meant as a complaint toward Verio - I'm simply trying to
decide why we should go to the added expense of entering our routes in a
RADB. To date I have seen no operational difference between using RADB
and not using
A) Verio provides a free db for its customers
They're not the only ones, CWI and Level3 do as well, off the top of my
head.
B) Altdb is free, and works great
That it does, round of applause for Steve :)
Jeff
--
Jeffrey Meltzer
ICS/VillageWorld
631-218-0700 x100
On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
Who actually uses RADB to build filters other than Verio? While my
experience with other providers is limited Verio is the only one (of the
ones we have used) who used RADB entries for BGP peers.
AFAIK, Level3 and CW.
Teleglobe as well
On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 11:31:30AM -0500, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
So, let's recap why no one uses them (as many have said already in the
related
thread): Laziness. The same laziness that results in the slew of other
things
many folks have pointed out not being addressed.
-danny
25 matches
Mail list logo
