nanog mailing list archives
Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits]
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:02:14 -0400
Of course! Including headers to show authenticity. I was very amused by the explanation of the "chicken and egg" problem. Who's creating that? The networks who refuse to peer with non-peeringdb registered ASNs, or peeringdb who won't recognize ASNs that are not peering with anyone because nobody wants to peer with them because they are not registered in peeringdb because nobody wants to peer with them? You get the idea.
First, most networks do not require a PDB record to peer. (Silly of them, I know, but still true.) Second, you do not need to have a PDB record to get a link to an IXP. Even membership in a free IXP is sufficient for an account in PDB, as Grizz points out below. Third, if you have an agreement, even just an email, saying a network will peer with you once you have a record, that may well suffice. Have you asked any network to peer? Private peering (because you are not on an IXP) is usually reserved for networks with more than a modicum of traffic. If your network is large enough to qualify for private peering, I have trouble believing you cannot get another network to agree to peer so you can get a record. I guess you are right, the _Peering_DB does not register “certain” networks. Those networks would be ones that do not peer. Which seems pretty obvious to me - it is literally in the name. -- TTFN, patrick
On Aug 18, 2021, at 5:50 PM, Sabri Berisha <sabri () cluecentral net> wrote: ----- On Aug 18, 2021, at 2:21 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patrick () ianai net <mailto:patrick () ianai net> wrote: Hi,On Aug 18, 2021, at 5:00 PM, Matthew Walster <matthew () walster org> wrote:On Wed, 18 Aug 2021, 21:37 Sabri Berisha, <sabri () cluecentral net> wrote: ----- On Aug 18, 2021, at 2:46 AM, Steve Lalonde steve () enta net wrote: Hi,We always use PeeringDB data and refuse to peer with networks not in PeeingDBYou are aware that PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks, right? It is most certainly not a single source of truth.Would you care to expand on this?I am extremely interested in hearing about this as well. Specific examples would be useful.Of course! Including headers to show authenticity. I was very amused by the explanation of the "chicken and egg" problem. Who's creating that? The networks who refuse to peer with non-peeringdb registered ASNs, or peeringdb who won't recognize ASNs that are not peering with anyone because nobody wants to peer with them because they are not registered in peeringdb because nobody wants to peer with them? You get the idea. Thanks, Sabri AS31064 Return-Path: grizz () peeringdb com <mailto:grizz () peeringdb com> Received: from mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> (LHLO mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/>) (195.16.84.32) by mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> with LMTP; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CED64001EF for <sabri () cluecentral net <mailto:sabri () cluecentral net>>; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3TLvVaNdjHGA for <sabri () cluecentral net <mailto:sabri () cluecentral net>>; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ubersmith.peeringdb.com <http://ubersmith.peeringdb.com/> (ubersmith.peeringdb.com <http://ubersmith.peeringdb.com/> [107.6.74.106]) by mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5B164001A9 for <sabri () cluecentral net <mailto:sabri () cluecentral net>>; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:47:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ubersmith.peeringdb.com <http://ubersmith.peeringdb.com/> (Postfix, from userid 48) id D8AF377C1A; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 04:46:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 04:46:29 -0400 To: Sabri Berisha <sabri () cluecentral net <mailto:sabri () cluecentral net>> From: support () peeringdb com <mailto:support () peeringdb com> Reply-To: support () peeringdb com <mailto:support () peeringdb com> Subject: Re: [#9192] [PeeringDB] User (sabri) Requesting Access (New Company - Cluecentral Inc) Message-ID: <1bac170d74e5d3702d3a28b237c87260 () ubersmith peeringdb com <mailto:1bac170d74e5d3702d3a28b237c87260 () ubersmith peeringdb com>> Dear PeeringDB user, Registering with peeringDB and peering negotiations are sort of egg and chicken problem. We only want to have networks registered that already do have settlement free peering. After some basic checks it looks like you are only buying transit from 6939/Hurricane Electric, but are not connected to any Internet Exchange (e.g. AMS-IX/NL-ix) yet. Having said this, is it acceptable to you to wait until you have your 1st settlement free peering setup? If you already have existing peering sessions, please provide the following details to support your request for peeringdb access: Your AS number(s) Which IXP / facilities you are peering at Some of your peering partners (again AS numbers / name) Please send your answers to support () peeringdb com <mailto:support () peeringdb com> or reply to this ticket. Best regards, PeeringDB admin on Duty PeeringDB Listserv information: PeeringDB Announce: http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-announce <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-announce> PeeringDB Governance: http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov> PeeringDB Technical: http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech> PeeringDB User Discuss: http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-discuss <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-discuss> -- Florian Hibler <fhibler () peeringdb com <mailto:fhibler () peeringdb com>> PeeringDB Administrator
Current thread:
- Setting sensible max-prefix limits Lars Prehn (Aug 18)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Steve Lalonde (Aug 18)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Denis Fondras (Aug 18)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Lars Prehn (Aug 18)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Sabri Berisha (Aug 18)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Matthew Walster (Aug 18)
- PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Patrick W. Gilmore (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Sabri Berisha (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Patrick W. Gilmore (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Sabri Berisha (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Niels Bakker (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Rubens Kuhl (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Sabri Berisha (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Niels Bakker (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Randy Bush (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Matthew Walster (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Nick Hilliard (Aug 19)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Denis Fondras (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Randy Bush (Aug 18)
- Re: Setting sensible max-prefix limits Steve Lalonde (Aug 18)
- Re: PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks [was: Setting sensible max-prefix limits] Ben Maddison via NANOG (Aug 19)