RADB Fee Structure
Thank you Craig, For dropping a further description of
what the shorter announcement lacked . I do appreciate your
taking the time (finally) to enlighten us . I had dire
thoughts of burning merit in effigy for such last minute
no other way out but to pay tactics . Again I say thank you.
I do prefer to think highly of Merit & its teams . Twyal, JimL
I just have written (through I am out of this problems) - I can't discuss
the fee idea, but any attempt to REMOVE something unpaid can destroy the
internet at whole... This days a lot of filters over the world are built
from this data bases, and a lot of networks can (simple) forgot to pay...
The alternative idea should be to block the future changes for the unpaid
objects - at least it's safe and can not destroy the network.
Alex. /I am in Russia now, and don't bother about RA-DB fee, but I am
bother about the Internet stability/.
Right. In going over my Qwest contract I signed last week, it's required
that I have maintainer objects in the RADB in order to get my BGP
announcements listened to by Qwest since they build their filters out of
it. I had no problem with that on Friday when I signed, but upon hearing
that unpaid objects would be removed, I'm a bit worried now. If Merit can
promise that they won't make a single mistake and accidentally remove
someone's objects for non-payment, then I'm all for it and don't mind
paying for the service. But seeing as how humans make mistakes, I can
only guess that it will happen at least once, and it could be highly
annoying if it happens often or to the right maintainer object.
I concur with you. It's much safer to just block all changes to objects
that haven't been paid for instead of outright deleting them. Not to cast
aspersions upon Merit, but the last thing we need is a registry that makes
mistakes like NSI has done to many in the past.
Merit will mirror your registry if you setup one of the radb-type
daemons. They will do this at no charge. Offer free services to your
downstream. Or, maybe Qwest will start doing this, ask one of the tech
people!
Right. In going over my Qwest contract I signed last week, it's required
that I have maintainer objects in the RADB in order to get my BGP
announcements listened to by Qwest since they build their filters out of
it. I had no problem with that on Friday when I signed, but upon hearing
that unpaid objects would be removed, I'm a bit worried now. If Merit can
Hmm, do you remember all mistakes done in the domain data base? If someone
lost your domain, you can at least look on the WWW page or sent a mail; if
someone lost your routing, you can turn off all your equipment and go
fishing /and you can close your business/. And remember, we are going to
the VoIP telephony - in some cases you even can not call them...
No, any attempt to remove route objects (not the maintaners) due to some
fee's means the death of the RA-DB as the route-registry.
Alex.
paying for the service. But seeing as how humans make mistakes, I can
only guess that it will happen at least once, and it could be highly
annoying if it happens often or to the right maintainer object.I concur with you. It's much safer to just block all changes to objects
that haven't been paid for instead of outright deleting them. Not to cast
aspersions upon Merit, but the last thing we need is a registry that makes
mistakes like NSI has done to many in the past.--
Joseph W. Shaw - jshaw@insync.net
Free UNIX advocate - "I hack, therefore I am."> I just have written (through I am out of this problems) - I can't discuss
> the fee idea, but any attempt to REMOVE something unpaid can destroy the
> internet at whole... This days a lot of filters over the world are built
> from this data bases, and a lot of networks can (simple) forgot to pay...
>
>
> The alternative idea should be to block the future changes for the unpaid
> objects - at least it's safe and can not destroy the network.
>
> Alex. /I am in Russia now, and don't bother about RA-DB fee, but I am
> bother about the Internet stability/.
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
VoIP is all well and good, but if you don't have an alternate method
of contacting people besides your (Vo)IP network, you have bigger issues
at hand than the RADB deleting your routing entries due to non-payment.
I for one am an advocate for the "no pay, no change/support" policy - if
you don't pay, then you don't get support (past some basic email support)
and you can't change many/all details. Australia's .com.au space went
that way during the free->paid transition a while back.
My 2c,
Adrian
Speaking about the mirroring... in Russion, we are
saying 'the road to the hell is build from the holy intentions' (sure
there exist something like in English too).
An Internet is the very thin and complex system, and today RA-DB is an
important part of it. Playing games with the 'authomatic-removing' can
cause the dangerous results.
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Cappuccio <chris@dqc.org>
To: Joe Shaw <jshaw@insync.net>
Cc: Alex P. Rudnev <alex@virgin.relcom.eu.net>,
Craig Labovitz <labovit@merit.edu>, nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ** ANNOUNCE -- New RADB Fee Structure **
> I concur with you. It's much safer to just block all changes to objects
> that haven't been paid for instead of outright deleting them. Not to cast
> aspersions upon Merit, but the last thing we need is a registry that makes
> mistakes like NSI has done to many in the past.
>Merit will mirror your registry if you setup one of the radb-type
daemons. They will do this at no charge. Offer free services to your
downstream. Or, maybe Qwest will start doing this, ask one of the tech
people!
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)