morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Sat Oct 27 18:28:27 UTC 2012
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Anurag Bhatia <me at anuragbhatia.com> wrote:
> Hi Blair
> I guess that's pretty much because they don't really wish to put any info
> related to routers in public including location & circuit bandwidth which is
> often given major networks in PTR.
more over, what help is it? I'm of two minds really about this:
1) it's handy to say: the router in elbonia is being 'bad'
2) it's just as simple to say: 'your router with interface ip 18.104.22.168
is being bad'
(or: "everything through 22.214.171.124 is forked... plstofixkthxbi!")
It's often cited as a headache to maintain the PTRs (not really,
automation ftw!) I think really it gets down to "how does it really
> Btw I guess you must be troubleshooting some routing issue. My experience
> has been decent with them in past. They are usually responsive on the email
> addresses mentioned in peering db for AS15169.
also folk watch this list (and others)...though certainly the proper
contact method is that which is in peeringdb.
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Christopher Morrow
> <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:52 PM, nanog <nanog at afxr.net> wrote:
>> > On 10/26/2012 7:13 PM, Blair Trosper wrote:
>> >> I'm sure I'm bringing up a topic that's been brought up before, but I
>> >> figured I'd have a go.
>> >> Anyone from Google around that could answer to why there is no reverse
>> >> DNS/PTR with most Google IP addresses (from traceroute, etc)?
>> >> Alternatively, is there a server that can be utilized by the net
>> >> operators
>> >> community to at least get an answer on some of the IPs?
>> >> It's very frustrating to contend with no PTR records in traces for
>> >> troubleshooting and the like.
>> >> Any information (off list or on) would be greatly appreciated.
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Blair Trosper
>> >> Updraft Networks & North Texas GigaPOP
>> > Which particular address are you referring to?
>> > I get PTR responses for the limited set of address I get from google.
>> examples are good... I suspect he means things inside 15169's network
>> that are not serving external people services: 126.96.36.199
>> for instance?
> Anurag Bhatia
> Linkedin | Twitter | Google+
More information about the NANOG