nanog mailing list archives
Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8
From: Steve Heimlich <heimlich () ans net>
Date: Tue, 2 May 1995 17:43:36 -0400
Daniel,
does this mean that after May 8th European operators will have to submit route objects to the RADB even though they have registered route objects in the RIPE RR? If yes, how do we proceed to eliminate the need for this double registration requirement?
Let me give you the ANS perspective on this one: We hope to take RIPE RR registrations as authoritative for European operators, eliminating need for redundant registrations. This just seems to make sense, assuming that the RIPE registry is at least as valid a place from which to pull European route objects as the RADB. Almost certainly we will not be able to flash cut this on 5/8 (one thing at a time), but it's definitely part of the process. We'll do this by sucking routes out of radb.ra.net, but that should include the "latest" info mirrored with source:RIPE as I understand it. Steve
Current thread:
- PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Dale S. Johnson (May 01)
- PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Daniel Karrenberg (May 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Steve Heimlich (May 02)
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Hank Nussbacher (May 02)
- PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Daniel Karrenberg (May 03)
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Michael H. Behringer (May 03)
- PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Daniel Karrenberg (May 03)
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Sean Doran (May 03)
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Steve Heimlich (May 03)
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Dale S. Johnson (May 03)
- Re: PRDB Retirement next Monday, May 8 Steven J. Richardson (May 04)