North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: RWHOIS, SWIP, and proving ownership
> Consider this a side note to the preceding discussion. > > 1. Most of our clients understand that their ''lease'' on network address > space is at our whim, by contract for IP connectivity, and is subject > to renumbering if WE assign them new space, if WE are assigned new space, > or if they move elsewhere. > > Therefore they don't ask us to SWIP the nets nor do they care. > So... > 2. RWHOIS doesn't run on any production operating system. I know Unix is > in vogue, but since we do the 99.96% uptime schtick, we use operating > systems that stay up (VMS). This means we can't run RWHOIS (even if we > did want to, which if you read #1 above you'll see we don't.) > I don't see any reason you couldn't modify RWHOIS to compile/run on VMS. It's pretty straightforward C code with very few UNIX specific calls in it. Admittedly, we run UNIX (which has been up 99.96%+ at our site). In fact, the last time I worked in a shop with a bunch of VMS users, the VMS system was down alot more often than our UNIX systems. Oh well... Guess it's religion. > 3. We currently use almost all of a /18, two thirds of a /19, a few /22s, > and some /24s. It would be easy to justify a /17 based on all this, but > if someone wanted to be rigid about RWHOIS and SWIP, even a bunch of > traceroutes aren't going to convince them. > > Back in THE GOOD OLD DAYS (tm), we said "Be flexible with what you accept, > be rigid with what you send out." (Others made it sound better and put it > in RFCs... D.C. for one.. :) > That applies to network protocols and interactions between machines. > Nowadays I see the motto has become "Be rigid in what you accept, and modify > your templates as often as possible." This criticism applies equally to the > RA IRR as it does to the InterNIC. > I will support this criticism of the NIC, but the RA has not refused any of my submissions based on templates over a year old. > Gee, and this started out as one sentence that went "We don't run RWHOIS, our > clients don't want it, our operating system won't support it, and you better > listen when we ask for a /17 ;)" > We don't conform to any standard, we don't care what the rest of the net does, and you better give us what we want when we want it. Cute. I expected better from you of all people, Ehud. > Ehud > Owen - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|