nanog mailing list archives
Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects?
From: Tim Howe <tim.h () bendtel com>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 09:39:08 -0700
On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 14:30:06 +0900 Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
So who do we ask about making IRRs expire defunct objectsyou might start with a rigorous definition of defunct
I can come up with a number of examples, but the ones that concern me the most are route objects where the route should not (or should no longer) originate from the origin AS. Some of these that I found were probably never correct. I can detail what I think were the chain of events that led to their creation, but I'm not sure it would be On Topic. --TimH
Current thread:
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Randy Bush (Oct 31)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Jared Mauch (Nov 01)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Jimmy Hess (Nov 01)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Rob Seastrom (Nov 01)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Baldur Norddahl (Nov 02)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Rob Seastrom (Nov 02)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Jimmy Hess (Nov 01)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Jared Mauch (Nov 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Ca By (Nov 01)
- Re: Is it unusual to remove defunct rr objects? Tim Howe (Nov 01)