Dear Janos,
Janos Zsako writes :
Christian,
The famous "advisory" attribute which seems to be still needed by ANS to get their routing done is especially cumbersome because it has to be applied to and maintained for every single "route" object. If the "advisory" attribute could be added to the "aut-num" object, entering an "advisory" there could cover all routes originated by this AS. Of course the ANS people will have to slightly modify their software.
As far as I see David Kessens has already made the necessary changes in the DB software. :)
True, I believe that we finally decided to put an action on the RIPE NCC to do just add it. I did the software change but the documentation is not ready so I didn't announce it yet. Note that it doesn't mean that ANS actually uses this attribute ...
First of all, with respect to the `[single]' qualifier. If we indeed allow only one such advisory attribute for the AS (aut-num), then the AS can express its
That should be [multiple], I just changed it. Kind regards, David Kessens RIPE NCC ---
First of all, with respect to the `[single]' qualifier. If we indeed allow only one such advisory attribute for the AS (aut-num), then the AS can express its advisory recommendations to only one other AS for ALL of it routes. I know that this is somewhat theoretical, since only ANS use the advisory... Nevertheless ripe-130 says it could be used by any other organisation, although *everybody* is discouraged from using it at all.
An other approach to this problem would not need any change in the DB schema. We have the `remarks' attribute which can be used for any additional information related to the AS. I think it could also contain something like: "advisory: AS690 1:1800 2:1133 3:1239" which means, the aut-num would have the following remarks attribute: remarks: advisory: AS690 1:1800 2:1133 3:1239 In this case any AS could add as many remarks as needed for the advisories...
This is true for the `route' object as well.
I know it is not a good practice to use the attributes for other purpose than they are designed for, but in this case I feel the advisory is not more than a remark (actually an important one if you want to have NSFnet connectivity...). Two other arguments are in favour of this second solution: first is that RIPE descourages people from using the advisory, second is that ANS should be ready with the new software soon, and then nobody would (or at least should) use the advisory any more.
As you said, ANS have to make some (probably minor) changes in their software in order to get the advisory from the aut-num for all the routes originating in the AS corresponding to the aut-num. I do not think these changes are significantly less in the case there is an `advisory' attribute in the aut-num object, than in the case they have to parse the `remarks' attributes of the aut-num.
Further comments welcome!
Best regards, Janos
Janos Zsako zsako@banknet.net BankNet Tel: +36 1 160 16 42 Fax: +36 1 160 14 06