This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
- Previous message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
- Next message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Arturo Servin
arturo.servin at google.com
Fri Jun 7 09:50:50 CEST 2024
On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 11:21 PM Barry O'Donovan (Open Solutions) < barry at opensolutions.ie> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > One comment I did make was that it was paradoxical, on one hand, to > bemoan the depeering of large network(s) from route servers and discuss > how IXPs could engage to bring them back while, on the other hand, > trying to implement a practice which would dictate how and where they > should register their routing objects. > > > And this will definitely won't help to bring them back (and probably nothing will but we can try ... ) As I mentioned in my previous email, as stated in the MARNS for CDN/Cloud providers their approach for the same problem is different and possibly incompatible. In a perfect world where all RIR support and have the same APIs to manage IRR objects, this could have an opportunity, but in the current state of affairs for IRR management in RIRs, I think it is difficult. Regards as -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/connect-wg/attachments/20240607/9b1ba1ab/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
- Next message (by thread): [connect-wg] BCOP for the use of IRR DBs in IXP RS - Last call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]