- Test - lists.nanog.org

** ANNOUNCE -- New RADB Fee Structure **
by Craig Labovitz 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

RADB Fee Structure ------------------ Since 1995 Merit Network, Inc., has operated the RADB Internet Routing Registry as a free service to the community. Initial funding for the service came from the National Science Foundation as part of the Routing Arbiter project. In recent years, donations from a number of commercial Internet providers provided continued support for RADB operations. As Internet Routing Registry technology has matured, the RADB service has experienced explosive growth. Today, the RADB database handles well over a million queries a day from several thousand unique Internet end-sites. This growth in RADB usage, including a dramatically increased volume of email and telephone calls to the RADB help desk, has placed significant demands on RADB staff and equipment resources. In an effort to maintain the high level of RADB service as well as encourage the migration to a distributed database, Merit has implemented the following RADB fee structure: Beginning November 1, 1999, Merit Network, Inc., will begin charging RADB users a $200 yearly fee per maintainer object registered in the RADB Internet Routing Registry database. Credit card payment must be made by all RADB maintainer object owners within 60 days. Unpaid maintainer objects and all related objects will be disabled from the registry. Internet providers may register via the web by reading and accepting the Internet Routing Registry Maintainer Object Agreement, <https://www.radb.net/radb/agreement.html> and then by supplying the appropriate payment information. IMPORTANT: The registration fee for Internet providers PEERING with Route Server Next Generation <http://www.rsng.net> machines at the PAIX, Mae-East, Mae-West, AADS and PacBell exchange points is included as part of the RSNG service at these exchanges. Providers peering with the RSNG route servers at one or more of these five exchange points do *NOT* need to submit a $200 payment for any maintainer objects registered with their autonomous system number in the RADB. Alternatives to Registering in the RADB --------------------------------------- As an alternative to the RADB, Internet providers are welcome to maintain their own local registry. Several groups, including Merit Network, have recently developed RPSL-capable Internet Routing Registry database servers. These *FREELY* available IRR server daemons, including IRRd, provide a simple mechanism for providers to maintain a mirror of Internet registry data and a local repository of customer routing information. As part of the transition to RPSL and RPS-DIST, Merit now strongly encourages RADB users to begin operating their own local routing registries. Merit will continue to freely mirror and permit mirroring by other local ISP registries. For more information on running your own IRR registry, see: http://www.irrd.net http://www.ripe.net/db http://www.isi.edu/ra As an alternative to the RADB or running a local registry, RADB users may also choose to register in several alternative IRR databases. Several providers, including Cable & Wireless and Bell Canada, offer IRR registration service for their downstream customers. For a complete list of participating Internet Routing Registries, please see http://www.radb.net/list.html. More Information ---------------- For more information, please see the RADB web page at http://www.radb.net Or feel free to send email to db-admin(a)radb.net -- Craig Labovitz (425) 605-4296 (office) (425) 936-7329 (fax)

9 10

RE: Major asia pacific public exchange points
by K Dhanaseker 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

Hello, Data.com has compiled an article on the APIX . http://www.data.com/global_networks/backbones.html Though it is dated , might be a good starting point. There is another article on APIX peering w/ PAIX. http://www.data.com/story/DCM19990730S0001 Thanks ! Regards, Dhanaseker Network Engineer Trinus Corp Glendale,CA 91203 Ph: 908-230-2578 -----Original Message----- From: Sean Donelan To: nanog(a)merit.edu Sent: 10/26/99 3:34 PM Subject: Major asia pacific public exchange points What are the, or are there any, major international public exchange points in the Asia-Pacific region? I know about the wwww.ep.net web page listing lots of exchange points. For example, an exchange point with at least two multi-regional/multi-continent ISPs. Europe has the LINX, AMS-IX, dGIX, etc.

1 0

WC outage?
by Tatsuya Kawasaki 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

It appeared WC is experiencing some major outage somewhere. Any idea? Tatsuya /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Tatsuya Kawasaki KIVEX.com (Division of Allegiance Telecom) Unlock the Power of the Internet http://www.kivex.com Phone 301.215.6777 Fax 301.215.5991 Affiliation given for identification not representation /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

2 1

WC fiber cut at GA.
by Tatsuya Kawasaki 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

According to WC, it happened about 3 hours ago. I have no other info. any info? Tatsuya /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Tatsuya Kawasaki KIVEX.com (Division of Allegiance Telecom) Unlock the Power of the Internet http://www.kivex.com Phone 301.215.6777 Fax 301.215.5991 Affiliation given for identification not representation /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

1 0

Re: Major asia pacific public exchange points
by Hyunseog Ryu/Brookfield/Norlight 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

MAEMURA Akinori <maem(a)mesh.ad.jp>@merit.edu on 10/26/99 10:18:09 PM Sent by: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu To: bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com cc: nanog(a)merit.edu (bcc: Hyunseog Ryu/Brookfield/Norlight) Fax to: Subject: Re: Major asia pacific public exchange points Bill, Thanks for the reply, :"bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com" wrote : at Tue, 26 Oct 1999 20:21:35 -0700 (PDT) ..... : :| > :| I think there's also one in Seoul called KIX as well, but I'm not entirely :| > :| sure. :| > :| > Yes, KIX is in Seoul but I think it is domestic IX. In :| > Japan as well there is no IXes which can be called :| > international one. :| :| As I understand, KIX is mostly domestic Korea. >Yes. Exact name is KTIX. Because of naming conflict, they are called KTIX. But I think they are doing Asia-Pacific Hub or something like that. Actually they have two kinds of backbone. One is for transit servier, Internet eXcange Point including international connection. Another is for domestic connection. In South Korea, they have 4 kinds of IX. One is KTIX running by Korea Telecom. Other things is DIX running by DaCom (A.K.A. BORA-Net) and Inet IX(maybe KINX?) running by I-Net Technology. DaCom IX and KIX is bigger. But three are carrying the several international connection. I heard that NCA (National Computing Agency?, parent organization of KRNIC) tried to maintain International eXchange Point for other ISP, so called KIX-NCA. But I'm not sure. It's 2 year's old information. I left South Korea at the time. You can contact with South Korea NOG group. http://www.nog.or.kr mailto:nog@nog.or.kr You can see the connection status of South Korea Internet. http://www.krnic.net/english/net/net.html Hyunseog Ryu Network Engineer/Applications Engineering Norlight Telecommunications

1 0

AS3254/Lucky.net contact details
by Ryan O`Connell 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

Hi, (Disclaimer: I know this isn't the ideal forum, but some people just don't keep ARIN/RIPE contact details up to date) Does anyone have reliable, English-speaking contact details for AS3254/Lucky.net? I'm trying to contact them regarding malicious activity ("Hackers" to misuse the term) but I'm not getting any response to E-Mails. Thanks. --- Ryan O'Connell - On:Line Finance IT Department - <roconnell(a)olf.co.uk> Direct Voice Line: 01932 704320 Fax: 0870 242 2201 The gold road's sure a long road, winds on through the hills for fifteen days The pack on my back is aching, the straps seem to cut me like a knife I'm standing alone, I'm watching you all, I'm seeing you sinking I'm standing alone, You're weighing the gold, I'm watching you sinking

1 0

Questions about the new RADB Maintainer Fee (FAQ available)
by Craig Labovitz 27 Oct '99

27 Oct '99

Merit has received a substantial number of questions about the new RADB fee structure. A FAQ which addresses the most common of these questions is now available -- please see: http://www.radb.net/faq.html - Craig -- Craig Labovitz labovit(a)merit.edu Merit Network, Inc. http://www.merit.edu/~labovit 4251 Plymouth Road, Suite C. (734) 764-0252 (office) Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2785 (734) 647-3185 (fax)

1 0

Re: Traffic engineering tools
by Andrew Bender 26 Oct '99

26 Oct '99

> From tony1(a)home.net Tue Oct 26 05:39:16 1999 > Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 22:13:35 -0700 > From: Tony Li <tony1(a)home.net> > To: Alex P. Rudnev <alex(a)virgin.relcom.eu.net> > Cc: Vadim Antonov <avg(a)kotovnik.com>, abender(a)tns-inc.com, akyol(a)pluris.com, > nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Traffic engineering tools > > > Alex, > > You are absolutely correct. A critically damped, dynamic traffic engineering system would provide benefits above and beyond that which can be derived in a static system. > > However, the dynamic system is non-trivial to construct. As has been shown with routing protocols that react to dynamic changes, it is very easy to underdamp the system, with catastrophic results. > > I certainly believe that such dynamic systems are possible, and certainly folks with enough > background in control theory could contribute wonderfully here. However, the state of the art > isn't quite there yet. Sigh. > > "And that's the way it is..." > - Walter Cronkite Hear, hear! Beside simply solving the static minimization problem, decentralized computation, and consideration of disjoint restoration paths are what I see to be necessary prerequisites ( and arguably quite "interesting" ones ) for the realization of dynamic TE. Evading these is something that we seem to have succeeded at, as engineers. As "easy" as it may be to prove the computational complexity of a problem, I find offense instead in equating such a result with a decisive judgement on practical tractability. I agree with Mr. Li that this is an approachable domain, although many of its challenges remain areas of active interest. The design of contemporary network elements suggests the unfortunate level of attention this topic receives. Despite impressive improvements in datapath, equipment control planes still seem to be sized / designed for maintenance of traditional topologies with established methods. 1000MIPS* integer cores are readily available in general purpose, commodity devices, and higher performance is neither impractical nor unknown. The possibilities this suggests for performance headroom of control systems should permit more serious consideration of practical solutions for dynamic TE than is observed today, dispensing with easy reasons not to implement path otimization or TE as a (semi-) automated, online function. Regards, Andrew Bender Total Network Solutions, Inc. (* Yes, this metric is an arbitrary and somewhat bogus oversimplication)

3 2

Re: RADB Fees
by Dean Anderson 26 Oct '99

26 Oct '99

Oh come on. AV8 is pretty small, and I'll pay the fee. Though, I think $200 is pretty high for what is provided. I mean, its just a database entry after all. Right? Server operation at exchanges is paid for by server users at the exchanges. Right? So we pay Internic the outrageously high fee of $35 per year for domain registration... Doesn't seem that much different... --Dean Around 09:49 PM 10/25/1999 -0400, rumor has it that Majdi Abbas said: > >Owen wrote: >> While I agree with you in principal, the reality is that we live >> in a capitalist society, and governments are eliminating the socialist >> funding of these mechanisms which has allowed them to exist to date. >> If they are to continue to exist, they will require a source of >> funding. If you have an alternative that is better than user fees, >> please propose it. Otherwise, please recognize that this isn't >> an effort to nickle and dime so much as the result of multiple >> independent agencies being forced to self-fund their pieces of >> internet infrastructure as they lose their government funding. > > I don't see it as being cost recovery (although it is >certainly intended as such)...more as cost shifting. Here's >how it'll work: > > The people who will be affected will, in many cases, >either pool their resources (maintainers, in this case), or >get their upstreams to start handling their RADB entries. > > The end result? Merit will recover a lot less of >their costs than they might expect, and the larger ISPs >out there will get hit hard -- suddenly they're doing a >lot more administrative work than they used to have to. > > Smaller ISPs and people who just don't care enough >will stop using the RADB or not start in the first place >if they perceive the obstacles as outweighing the benefits-- >thus making it a less effective resource than it is today. > > Short term, because Merit hasn't been very public >about it to date, even on this mailing list (which was the >first on my list), a lot of people will be receiving bills >they're unaware of, and may or may not be able to get paid >on time -- presuming the maintainer contact was even up to >date in the first place -- so a lot of objects go away in >the database, and the internet will become a much less >happy place until things are resolved. > > I don't have an issue with the cost recovery aspects, >I just feel that this is rather short notice, and also rather >poorly timed (a lot of people are still busy with y2k issues, >it would have been better to wait until sometime next year). > > --msa > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3 2

Re: ** ANNOUNCE -- New RADB Fee Structure **
by Dean Anderson 26 Oct '99

26 Oct '99

Around 06:55 PM 10/26/1999 +0200, rumor has it that Adrian Chadd said: >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. Hehhhh. Then you have bigger issues than RADB... VOIP has quietly taken over like the phantom menace. How do you suppose 5cent long distance is getting implemented? (Using a 2 or 3 cpm VOIP network...) It might still be too early to really say "taken over". But you will be assimilated. ;-) Now, probably none of these networks are really part of the "public internet", but I'd have to wonder how they might be affected if there were some kind of severe problem in other parts of the internet... With PSTN - IP - PSTN connnectivity, the network can be private, and not interact with the rest of the Internet. We expect they would not be affected. But I'm not sure that will be true with PSTN - IP(vendor1) - IP(vendor2) - PSTN connectivity between vendors. Routing issues on the "public internet" can affect possibly affect this. P.S. If you want to see something really cool, check out dialpad.com. Upgrade to netscape 4.7/IE 5.0 first. --Dean ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0