Domain names for ISP infrastructure links
John W. Stewart III
jstewart at metro.isi.edu
Tue Jan 7 22:25:12 UTC 1997
conventions are fine
and it's helpful to users and operators alike for names to
contain a fair amount of information
but "standardizing" with fixed-width fields, pop codes,
next-hop router, etc. doesn't seem that productive when
providers are gonna do what they want anyway. better to
encourage them to include certain information in their
names than specify how to spell DC
p.s. as for recording the next-hop router, what happens
on a lan? and what about an atm interface over which many
> Dorian R. Kim supposedly said:
> > On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Philip J. Nesser II wrote:
> > > 1. I really like the addition of the final pop-router combo so its easy
> > > follow connections. This has been missing in other suggestions so I am
> > > curious as to what others think.
> > I'm puzzled. Connections go from router to router. How does it help to say
> > routerb-x-y-z-routerc.blah.net when routerc will show up as the next hop i
> > the traceroute?
> True, but as was pointed out at the last NANOG, sometimes routes change in
> the middle of traceroute, and seeing where the next hop should be and where
> it actually goes is more apparent if its encoded on the DNS name. I
> certainly can live without it if people don't like it, but for me it seems
> like the right thing to do.
> > > 2. Using an fixed width format as proposed keeps the maximum length (no
> > > including the domain suffix) short. Assuming 2 digit router/interface
> > > numbers and a four digit DLCI, the max length is 24 characters. (Even i
> > > we allow 3 digits to router numbers we max at 29). I would propose to a
> > > a little more information in the form of 1 letter types in from of the
> > > numbers (like a 'd' before the DLCI number). Looking at the example abo
> > > is marginally okay because all field are present but what if there was
> > > either no subinterface or no DLCI, how would you tell what the last numb
> > > is supposed to mean?
> > As long as we are going to code router specific things in the DNS, they ar
> > going to be a wide variety of thing to indicate.
> > We use the following scheme.
> > <routername> - <interface designation> <slot number> - <card slot number>
> > [<port number> [s <sub-interface number>].<pop>.cic.net.
> > where interface designation is [fddi|hssi|ser|ether|fastether|atm|token|po
> > i.e.
> > um1-fastether3-0-0s1.ann-arbor.cic.net
> Could we agree on a fixed width interface designation? fe instead of
> fastether? tk instead of token? etc..
> > > 3. How do people feel about putting the speed of the link in the DNS na
> > > I have seen one yea and one nay. I am ambivilant, but leaning towards n
> > Speed of the link is not important IMO.
> > > 4. Are people actually interested in pursuing this formally? If a spec
> > > written would you change your DNS names to conform? Would you be willin
> > That depends on what's agreed on. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, an
> > are names.
> > > to set up a formal registration process with the IANA for 2(or 3) letter
> > > pop codes to be consistant?
> > If you wanted that, why not take the airport codes as many have already do
> Agreed, which is why I wanted to increase to 3 letter codes, but we need to
> make allowances for special places like the NAPS and the MAE's, which
> deserve their own pop codes.
> > -dorian
> ---> Phil
More information about the NANOG