[148593] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIS raw data
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Danny McPherson)
Thu Jan 19 08:52:54 2012
From: Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net>
In-Reply-To: <m2sjjbsvkr.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 08:51:42 -0500
To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 19, 2012, at 7:52 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> of course, taking anything from the IRR literally is na=EFve at best.
Unfortunately, if the BGPSEC, RPKI and SIDR work stays course in the =
IETF, we're still going to need IRR-esque policy capabilities (outside =
of route server and prefix origin bindings in that work), so we best =
starting figuring out how to make them suck less.
> some years back, i asked for a *simple minimal* tagging of =
announcements
> to route views, just peer, customer, internal. it got ietfed to utter
> uselessness, with more crap welded on to it than envisioned in mad =
max.
I agree, it's important to analyze systemic cost/benefit and complexity =
analysis and new operational impacts various standards work is =
introducing.
-danny =20=
