mailing list archives
Re: Domain names for ISP infrastructure links
From: "Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser () martigny ai mit edu>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:02:09 -0500 (EST)
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 to
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 in
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 (not
including the domain suffix) short. Assuming 2 digit router/interface
numbers and a four digit DLCI, the max length is 24 characters. (Even if
we allow 3 digits to router numbers we max at 29). I would propose to add
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 above
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 number
is supposed to mean?
As long as we are going to code router specific things in the DNS, they are
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|pos]
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 name,
I have seen one yea and one nay. I am ambivilant, but leaning towards no,
Speed of the link is not important IMO.
4. Are people actually interested in pursuing this formally? If a spec was
written would you change your DNS names to conform? Would you be willing
That depends on what's agreed on. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so
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 done?
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.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: Domain names for ISP infrastructure links Michael Dillon (Jan 07)