Summary of the RA situation was Re: Routing registry was Re: Sprint BGP filters in 207.x.x.x?

Now Bill Manning didn't NAME sprint yesterday in his complaint that I
have cited. But no one has told me that anyone else besides sprint was
intended for the criticism. Perhaps the question boils down to those
raised by Sean in the preceding paragraphs? What does need do be done to
the RADB and RS to give them value? There seems to be some strong
disagreement between the Routing Arbiter and Sprint. Why? What do they
see so differently? And if MCI, PSI, UUNET and ANS don't agree with
sean's criticisms why don't they?

  Thank you for the clarification. I was pointing out a
  process that would reduce the value of a routing registry.
  Extrapolations of that description to any specific provider
  would be presumptous without first hand knowledge.

  Now there is some truth in the statements wrt data accuracy
  in some sections of the IRR. I understand that providers
  who run sections of the IRR and use that data for router
  configuration tend to keep the data very accurate. In
  other sections of the IRR, the data has some historical
  reference and may be out of date. There is continued effort
  within the RA to identify the bogus data and find ways to
  remove it from the RAdb portion of the IRR.

  A process which would improve the accuracy of the data in
  the IRR is for providers run sections of the IRR on thier
  own, and use that data for their own router configurations.
  Now I understand that most large-scale providers do in fact,
  have databases for account managment. Some even use that data
  for router configuration. Now if they can export the formats
  that are specified in for IRR interoperability they are
  Km ahead in being able to participate in the IRR.. with
  vastly improved accuracy of data.