I-D (Re: Out of date contact information )
edm at halcyon.com
Tue May 7 00:21:41 UTC 1996
The issue of "response time" is a good one to consider. It might be nice
if "best current practice" for expected response times on each alias is
part of the documented list/table. This helps the providers to alias the
addresses to appropriate parties that would, hopefully, be able to provide
a response within a commonly expected timeframe. I suspect a lot of the
frustration experienced with inter-ISP communications has a lot to do with
different response time standards/expectations/understandings.
My $.02; YMMV,
On Mon, 6 May 1996, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
> In message <9605030534.AA13791 at wisdom.home.vix.com>, Paul A Vixie writes:
> > 3.2. Protocol Independent Addresses
> > Address Operations Area Example Usage
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > abuse Customer Relations Inappropriate public behaviour
> > noc Network Operations Network infrastructure problem
> > trouble Network Operations Synonym for ``noc''
> > support Customer Support Product or service not working
> At least with ANS "trouble" and "noc" are not synonymous. NOC is lots
> of people involved in network operations and normal trouble reporting
> (can't get there from here reporting) need not bother the whole group.
> Trouble is the current NOC staff on duty and are supposed to respond
> immediately to mail in the trouble mailbox, usually openning a trouble
> ticket and diagnosing the problem, in doing so starting the 15 minute
> escallation timer for the oncall engineer. They also in practice
> respond immediately to mail in the NOC mailbox, but then a lot of
> people not on duty have to delete the mail when they come on call
> which just makes more work.
> If other providers have the same conventions or agree that these
> conventions are usefull, then write them up however you like (more
> briefly than I have done would be nice).
> Another common mailing list is routing at provider. This is intended
> more for technical routing questions or to resolve routing issues
> between providers. This is more for routing design issues so
> immediate response should not be expected on this list. Any "routing
> is broken" messages should go to trouble, so they need to they can
> page the people that can fix it rather than let it sit in some
> engineer's mailbox.
> It would be great if later you could include some of the NIC and IRR
> mailboxes. Maybe next revision. For example:
> auto-dbm Automated Registry Register routing objects
> except MCI - auto-rr at mci.net
> Only problem is I don't think there is consistency in the address
> registries and routing registries use of mail aliases. Maybe this
> could go on the RA web page and when there is better consistency, put
> this in an RFC.
Northwest Nexus Inc. (206) 455-3505 (voice)
Professional Internet Services
edm at nwnexus.WA.COM
More information about the NANOG