Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: RADB entry
From: "Eric Krichbaum" <eric () telic us>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:00:20 -0600

Absolutely.  I'd rather see it done responsibly.  It's hard to get rid of
bad data/incorrect data/stale data and it shouldn't be.  If done properly,
it would be much friendlier.  There is incentive for people to put data in
but not to remove the other.

Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: christopher.morrow () gmail com [mailto:christopher.morrow () gmail com] On
Behalf Of Christopher Morrow
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 8:51 AM
To: Eric Krichbaum
Cc: Chuck Church; nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: RADB entry

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Eric Krichbaum <eric () telic us> wrote:
 The origin being entered by a
provider as their own allows them to add the prefix (and have it 
accepted by anyone who filters them by prefix generated) without being 
forced to add a downstream (and downstream's downstreams) AS to their
AS-SET.

'proxy registration'... so nice... now you can't control your prefix data in
radb, how quaint!
'proxy registration' - never a good idea... not ever... adding cruft that's
not connected to the data owner to the database? recipe for
stale/old-n-busted data... hurray.




  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault