i wanna be a kpn peer

Patrick W. Gilmore patrick at ianai.net
Thu Jan 11 04:49:16 UTC 2007


On Jan 10, 2007, at 11:28 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

>> I don't think a spurious prefix directly injected into route-views is
>> proof a network is broken.
>
> we've had this discussion 42 times.  it is not proof of anything  
> and no
> one has said it is.  but if it was one of my areas of responsibility
> leaking something strange, i sure would not mind folk mentioning it
> here.  in fact, i would be greatful.

It is not proof.  No one said it was.  And no one said you said it  
was. :)

That said, I would be grateful if someone showed me I screwed up too  
- in private.  In public, I'm not so sure.  Especially if someone  
only -thought- I screwed up.

One could argue that it is difficult to reach the proper people  
privately (although "[email protected]" might be a start, or iNOC-DBA, or ...).   
One could also argue that public notification is better than no  
notification.  But then one would might want to mention that private  
channels had been exhausted in one's public notification.

Anyway, this "one" is sorry if that "one" thought one was being  
curmudgeonly. :)

-- 
TTFN,
patrick




More information about the NANOG mailing list