Re: Description of Inter-AS Networks in the RIPE Routing Registry

[Daniel Karrenberg <]

  > Curtis Villamizar curtis@localhost writes:
  > 
  > I knew that the peering relationship was possible, but Barrnet and
  > NASA then have to ask ANS to change the database entry (to insure that
  > ptraceroute will still work) even if the two routers did not peer with
  > and ANS router.  

De facto that is not the case at the moment as anyone can change
a network entry in the RIPE database. (There *are* real-good audit
trails!) This however is not good style to do without at least notifying
(CCing) the admin contact for the network entry. Extremely good form
is to ask the admin contact to send in the change himself.

The only guarded attributes at this point are AS membership and 
community membership.

  > I was suggesting that we might want to have each AS
  > announce it's own routers or have a way for them to explicitly
  > delagate that authority to someone else.  Otherwise you could get
  > caught up in squabbles between competing network providers over
  > "proper" ownership of this authority.

I think this is a non-problem. If a bunch of providers can agree to connect
at a DMZ they usually also agree on who manages the DMZ or at least its
database entry.

Daniel