|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Routing registry was Re: Sprint BGP filters in 207.x.x.x?
At 10:30 PM 12/13/95, [email protected] wrote: ... >So if they were supposed to use the services of the routing arbiter and >appear to have renigged on this, what can anyone do?? Are they determined >to make it painfully obvious for all to see that there are no enforcement >teeth left at the NSF? I think you are assuming too much at this point. [About contractually having to play with the RA.] You should address that question to Sprint, rather than the mailing list. I believe SprintLink has voiced their willingness to work with any tool that will help the Internet scale better, so long as it does not have adverse effects on their network. The last time I checked, the _biggest_ argument against using the RA was that alot of the data is incorrect. I have also heard a lot about work that has been done to clean up the RA. Is this still the biggest factor? -Jeff [mssg. from the nanog archive...] ================================================================================== | Knowing Sean for who he is, I'm fairly sure that no RADB or RS will ever be | suitable to him. In particular... On the contrary; I believe Peter Lothberg's proposals for an RS scheme are quite reasonable. I think his criticisms of the current RADB and RS models are pretty well known, and valid. I would point out one more thing though, and that's that at the Stockholm IETF I had a genial chat with a number of folks from MERIT and the RA Team in general, and suggested several ways that the RADB could be made incrementally useful. I hope that some good comes out of that conversation. I'll use any tool that will make my job easier, and help our operation and the Internet scale better. At the moment, though, the RADB does the opposite, and the RS has no value whatsoever. Sean. =================================================================================== >Of course sprint is running a nap too. i understand that their position >is that the NAP is full. They have a BUNCH of people trying to get into >the NAP who are complaining to me that they get no answqers from sprint >as to when that will be possible. > >******************************************************************** >Gordon Cook, Editor & Publisher Subscriptions: Individ-ascii $85 >The COOK Report on Internet Individ. hard copy $150 >431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 Small Corp & Gov't $200 >(609) 882-2572 Corporate $350 >Internet: [email protected] Corporate Site Lic. $650 >Web: http://pobox.com/cook/ Newly expanded COOK Report Web Pages >******************************************************************** > > >On Wed, 13 Dec 1995 [email protected] wrote: > >> The large scale provider MichNet uses is MCI and they are required >> to cooperate with the RA and others. This is in their contract. I suspect >> that something similar might be in some of the other contracts of providers >> that provide service to networks that received funding from NSF for >> Interregional Connectivity. People might want to go read the fine >> print in their contracts. >> -Jeff Ogden >> Merit/MichNet >> > > >
|