From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Wed Nov 13 2002 - 19:11:29 GMT-3
At 8:59 AM +1100 11/14/02, Jason Sinclair wrote:
>Coming from an AsiaPac perspective, I can concur that APNIC do not mandate
>that RADB be utilised. In fact, in Australia there is a very low uptake rate
>of using RADB. The larger carriers tend to use the RADB to update their
>upstreams, however they use locally coded databases for access by their
>downstreams.
Do they run irrd as a first step?
Too bad...thinks of Paul Hogan saying "That's not a routing registry.
THIS is a routing registry." On the other hand, the threat of a
crocodile knife would be an incentive for anyone to register things.
:-)
> This is then manipulated according to policy and added to the
>RADB. Comparing how it is done here to how it is done in the US, for
>example, highlights how non-US countries seem to adhere to inefficient
>processes. I believe there was some talk a while ago of making it mandatory
>for any AS owner to utilise the RADB, however this died a quick death.
Actually, Jason, I have seen some of the best work in Europe rather
than the US.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 03 2002 - 07:22:59 GMT-3