Has PSI been assigned network 1?
curtis at ans.net
Mon Apr 24 20:28:31 UTC 1995
In message <m0s33hL-000301C at rip.psg.com>, Randy Bush writes:
> I have some tangential questions. Currently, we submit
> o NACRs
> o SWIPs to InterNIC
> o email re routing updates to Sprint
> o 81ish objects to MCI
> o 81ish objects to the RADB
> and I am told we will be moving to rwhois.
> 0 - Why the same data to MCI and RADB? It would seem reasonable to send all
> updates to one registry and have the others fetch what they need.
That is the goal. We're not there yet.
> 1 - When can do stop needing NACRs? Monday, i.e. effectively now?
Still need them. A lot of people are typing as fast as they can to
remove this requirement. Code takes time to write and debug.
> 2 - The RADB has a lot of old, now obsolete, data maintained by others. Do
> we have to ask each old maintainer to clean it out, or will it all be
> cleaned up as the changeover settles down?
If this is true, it will have to be cleaned up. Maybe someone from
ISI or Merit can comment on this.
> 3 - SWIPs and 81ish objects (and NACRs, but they're going away, yes?) share
> a non-trivial subset. Are there maintainers' tools for generating both
> from a single database? If not, we will surely create errors of
I'm not sure why a route object can't just indicate your intention to
route using and existing AS number, allowing you to register AS,
prefix, and prefix length and have the rest taken from InterNIC. This
requires coordination between InterNIC and the IRR. Ideally, InterNIC
would provide signed information indicating that you have SWIP
registered the prefix you are IRR registering (through RADB, MCI,
RIPE, or whatever). Again, it is mostly a "small matter of code".
> 4 - Are there more appropriate fora for weenie questions?
> FYI, despite the lack of rigor, Sprint's has seemed (from the bottom of the
> pond view) to be the most immediate and reliable over the many moons. ( Of
> course, with only 700 customers as compared to, e.g., Karl's 5,000 they have
> a much easier time of it. :-) But the overwhelming problem with all avenues
> has been the NACR delay.
The typical one week or less NACR delay is longer than a tail circuit
installation? Are you sure the problem isn't submitting the NACR
after the circuit is installed rather than when the circuit is
More information about the NANOG