** ANNOUNCE -- New RADB Fee Structure **
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@radb.net -- Craig Labovitz (425) 605-4296 (office) (425) 936-7329 (fax)
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 +----------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network Engineer | 25416 22nd So | Give me Linux | | babydr@baby-dragons.com | DesMoines WA 98198 | only on AXP | +----------------------------------------------------------------+
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/. On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Craig Labovitz wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 23:07:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Craig Labovitz <labovit@merit.edu> To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: ** ANNOUNCE -- New RADB Fee Structure **
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@radb.net
-- Craig Labovitz (425) 605-4296 (office) (425) 936-7329 (fax)
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)
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. -- Joseph W. Shaw - jshaw@insync.net Free UNIX advocate - "I hack, therefore I am." On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Alex P. Rudnev wrote:
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/.
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Joe Shaw wrote: | 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!
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:23:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Cappuccio <chris@dqc.org> Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu
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!
Sounds like something to ask Qwest about. I have an idea that Qwest has someone who is familiar with the care and feeding of routing registries and they already support the only IPv6 registry that I know of. R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
### On Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:57:07 -0700, "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> ### casually decided to expound upon Chris Cappuccio <chris@dqc.org> the ### following thoughts about "Re: ** ANNOUNCE -- New RADB Fee Structure **": KO> > Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:23:24 -0700 (PDT) KO> > From: Chris Cappuccio <chris@dqc.org> KO> > Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu KO> > KO> > Merit will mirror your registry if you setup one of the radb-type KO> > daemons. They will do this at no charge. Offer free services to your KO> > downstream. Or, maybe Qwest will start doing this, ask one of the tech KO> > people! KO> KO> Sounds like something to ask Qwest about. I have an idea that Qwest KO> has someone who is familiar with the care and feeding of routing KO> registries and they already support the only IPv6 registry that I know KO> of. Actually. I would like to see C&W start accepting and exporting mirrors. I'm already participating in realtime mirroring with RADB and RIPE. In order to be fully distributed and independent, I'd like for C&W to join the game. -- /*====================[ Jake Khuon <khuon@GCtr.Net> ]======================+ | Network Statistics Engineer, NSM/Net-Eng /~_ |_ () |3 /-\ |_ _ GLOBAL | | VOX: +1(408)543-4828 Fax: +1(408)543-4806 \_| C R O S S I N G CENTER | +===============[ 141 Caspian Court, Sunnyvale, CA 94089 ]===============*/
On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 08:57:07AM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:23:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Cappuccio <chris@dqc.org> Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu
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!
Sounds like something to ask Qwest about.
I will get a proposal to our management to address this issue as soon as possible.
I have an idea that Qwest has someone who is familiar with the care and feeding of routing registries and they already support the only IPv6 registry that I know of.
That is correct. In fact, one of the RPSL compatible databases was written by me. On an additonal note: ARIN recently setup an RPSL compatible IRR registry which might look like a very attractive alternative for those people that are currently using the RADB ... David K. ---
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. On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
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 **
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Joe Shaw wrote:
| 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)
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."
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Alex P. Rudnev wrote:
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)
On Tue, Oct 26, 1999, Alex P. Rudnev wrote:
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.
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 -- Adrian Chadd Systems Engineer <adrian@ip.versatel.net> Versatel Telecom BV Amsterdam, The Netherlands "Music in the soul can be heard by the universe" - Lao Tsu
participants (9)
-
Adrian Chadd -
Alex P. Rudnev -
Chris Cappuccio -
Craig Labovitz -
David Kessens -
Jake Khuon -
Joe Shaw -
Kevin Oberman -
Mr. James W. Laferriere