[110778] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alex H. Ryu)
Fri Jan 16 18:32:29 2009
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:32:22 -0600
From: "Alex H. Ryu" <r.hyunseog@ieee.org>
To: Jay Hennigan <jay@west.net>
In-Reply-To: <49711423.9040004@west.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I think it is really depending on what kind of provisioning system you
have.
Circuit ID is determined by your provisioning system for CLR/DLR reference.
As long as you can find circuit info quickly, it doesn't matter that much.
Alex
Jay Hennigan wrote:
> We've grown to the point that "The MCI T-1 in Ontario" or "Bob's
> ethernet to port 6/23 on switch 7" aren't scaling. Also in working
> with carriers we are frequently asked to provide our internal circuit
> number.
>
> I've seen a lot of the the LEC scheme NN-XXXX-NNNNNN where XXXX has
> some significance with regard to the speed and type of circuit. The
> leading NN seems to be a mystery and the trailing NNNNNN is a serial
> number.
>
> I've also seen DS1-NNNNNNN as a straight speed-serial number type of
> thing and horrendously long circuit numbers including CLLI codes such
> as 101/T3/SNLOCAGTH07/SNLOCA01K15 .
>
> Any suggestions from those who have been down this road as to a schema
> that makes sense and is scalable? Are there documented best practices?
>
> --
> Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net
> Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/
> Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
>
>
>
