Routing registry was Re: Sprint BGP filters in 207.x.x.x?

Jeff Barrows jbarrows at
Thu Dec 14 15:33:23 UTC 1995

 At 10:30 PM 12/13/95, cook at 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?


[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.


>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: cook at              Corporate Site Lic.  $650
>Web:    Newly expanded COOK Report Web Pages 
>On Wed, 13 Dec 1995 Jeff.Ogden at 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

More information about the NANOG mailing list