Keith Medcalf wrote:
... Dont know what web 2.0 is but the new portal is a web based
object management system complete
with recommended changes and inconsistency lists.
We just added prefix allocation check with backend information
from PCH (prefix checker tool).
Web 2.0 is marketroid
The other problem is that when a SP has a customer who can't figure it
out, a typical course of action is to just register the route for
them rather than try to explain it to them. Unfortunately, the same
thing as above happens here, you end up with a big pile of people who
register a
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:03:24PM -0400, Joe Provo wrote:
Experience proves otherwise. L3's filtergen is a great counter-example,
where the customer-specific import policy dictates sources to believe
regardless of what other stuff is in their local mirror. It happily
drops prefixes not
... Dont know what web 2.0 is but the new portal is a web based
object management system complete
with recommended changes and inconsistency lists.
We just added prefix allocation check with backend information
from PCH (prefix checker tool).
Web 2.0 is marketroid drivel-speak for a method
On 13/08/2009 04:03, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
In fact this is one of
the reasons why querying data from RIPE is such a pain, their query
language lacks a recursive service side expansion mechanism so the
transaction latency turns querying a large AS-SET into a multi-hour or
day long
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 04:57:07PM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that if someone put a nice web2.0+
interface on creating and managing these objects it would be a lot
easier.
Agreed, this is one of the projects I've been working on
the pccw lesson, which is also the
turk-telecom lesson
tangent here: what was the pccw and turk-telecom thing?
is the turk telco thing the Youtube fiasco?
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Andrew Euellandyz...@gmail.com wrote:
the pccw lesson, which is also the
turk-telecom lesson
tangent here: what was the pccw and turk-telecom thing?
is the turk telco thing the Youtube fiasco?
pccw + pktelecom == youtube incident
turk-telecom leaked covad +
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew Weaverdrew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
Anyone know why SAAVIS would be allowing PEER1 (AS 13768) to advertise routes
for whatever IP addresses they want?
sadly savvis didn't learn the pccw lesson, which is also the
turk-telecom lesson which is also the as7007
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew Weaverdrew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
Anyone know why SAAVIS would be allowing PEER1 (AS 13768) to advertise routes
for whatever IP addresses they want?
sadly savvis didn't learn the pccw lesson, which is also
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:20 PM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew Weaverdrew.wea...@thenap.com
wrote:
Anyone know why SAAVIS would be allowing PEER1 (AS 13768) to advertise
routes for whatever IP addresses they
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:20:28AM -0700, goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew Weaverdrew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
Anyone know why SAAVIS would be allowing PEER1 (AS 13768) to advertise
routes for whatever IP addresses
On Aug 12, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Joe Provo wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:20:28AM -0700, goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew
Weaverdrew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
Anyone know why SAAVIS would be allowing PEER1 (AS 13768)
Jared Mauch wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that if someone put a nice web2.0+ interface
on creating and managing these objects it would be a lot easier.
I've looked into IRR several times, usually after events like PCCW.
Each time the amount of work to 1) figure out how to implement IRR
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 04:57:07PM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that if someone put a nice web2.0+
interface on creating and managing these objects it would be a lot
easier.
Agreed, this is one of the projects I've been working on just haven't
had the time to
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:12:39 -0500
From: Justin Shore jus...@justinshore.com
Jared Mauch wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that if someone put a nice web2.0+ interface
on creating and managing these objects it would be a lot easier.
I've looked into IRR several times, usually
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:30:38PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
[snip]
While a web 2.0 app would be very nice, it's really not that hard to do
now. You do need the IRRToolSet or something similar. the IRRToolSet has
languished for a long time and was getting harder and harder to keep
running,
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:57:07 -0400, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net
wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that if someone put a nice web2.0+ interface
on creating and managing these objects it would be a lot easier.
If there were a customer portal where you could visit to say update my
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:41:03PM -0400, Joe Provo wrote:
Most ISPs don't have that level of management clue willpower, as the
same but they will go to $competator who doesn't require it! which
has screwed up everything from domain registration to responsible BGP
announcements fouls the
Subject: Re: Follow up to previous post regarding SAAVIS
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:41:03PM -0400, Joe Provo wrote:
Most ISPs don't have that level of management clue willpower, as the
same but they will go to $competator who doesn't require it! which
has screwed up everything from domain
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
I would make the opposite argument, my business would NEVER go to any
network which didn't support IRR (and a bunch of other simple but
important things, like a full set of non-secret BGP communities). It's
amazing the number of networks that
we put this web gui in place.
-manish
On Aug 12, 2009, at 6:55 PM, nanog-requ...@nanog.org wrote:
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:57:07 -0400
From: Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: Follow up to previous post regarding SAAVIS
To: nanog-p...@rsuc.gweep.net
Cc: nanog@nanog.org nanog
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:37:00PM -0500, Frank Bulk wrote:
Perhaps this is a stupid question, but does each SP need to run their own
physical RR? Isn't this something that could be hosted?
The data itself is stored on a distributed network of databases, so
there is technically no reason any
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Richard A Steenbergenr...@e-gerbil.net wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:37:00PM -0500, Frank Bulk wrote:
Perhaps this is a stupid question, but does each SP need to run their own
physical RR? Isn't this something that could be hosted?
The data itself is
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:06:49PM -0400, Joe Provo wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:16:38PM -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
[snip]
Unfortunately the distributed nature of the databases is one of the
biggest problems with the IRR system. Anyone can run an irrd, there is
You
25 matches
Mail list logo
