|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Lazy Engineers and Viable Excuses
* Richard A Steenbergen said: > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:10:57AM -0400, Leo Bicknell wrote: > > In a message written on Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 09:55:30AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote: > > > > Yes, it is that hard. Sadly, almost everyone I see push the IRR > > > > works for a small ISP. And at least half of those work for a small > > > > ISP in Europe. > > > > > > C&W, Level3, Global Crossing and NTT/Verio are small isps? > > > > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but they all use the IRR to filter > > customers. That's a fine application of the IRR, and one I encourage. > > I don't think any of them use the IRR to filter peers. Indeed, I > > can provde they don't filter certian big peers due to the fact they > > don't register thier routes at all. :) > > Global Crossing doesn't use the IRR to filter their BGP speaking > customers, every prefix-list update gets touched by a human. While their > response time is good, and they're generally friendly people, they do have > a tendancy to prove that they are human by forgetting or typoing a random > route with nearly every other update. When you start getting into the > hundreds of routes, personally I will go through the trouble to maintain > IRR entries any day vs letting humans break stuff. As is usual with most things, it's not black and white. It's a sticky position that some major providers find themselves in. A lot of customers do not maintain their IRR objects or even have them at all. The traction would have to come from the provider themselves in a lot of cases, but then customers are apt to complain when a major provider registers 'their' routes on an IRR ... kinda like a dog peeing on a hydrant, some customers tend to think registration means a kind of ownership claim. -Steve
|