Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
What do you think about this request?
In general, I think we should try to honor this request, cymru does useful work and it is a valid application of the data that we have.
On the technical side, I wonder why they need a BGP feed. This will be multihop BGP over a large number of intermediate nodes, with all stability issues related to that. It would also involve peerings with all RRC's. OTOH, the raw data does have the same info, is already downloadable, and does not suffer from stability problems. I might miss something here.
I don't understand either. You can get nothing from a feed that you can't get from the BGP data, and actually, you get much less, because the RRCs themselves perform route selection. So, for every prefix, instead of getting one route per peer, you get one route per RRC. There is also the question of what they are going to do with the data. Do we have permission from our peers to pass their routes on to someone else? The RIS peerings were set up with the assurance that the data would be made public and used to create services for the community. Just a couple of thoughts. Cheers, Lorenzo -- --------------------------------------------------------- Lorenzo Colitti Ph.D student Computer Networks research group Roma Tre University colitti@dia.uniroma3.it +39-0655173215 ---------------------------------------------------------