Re: Proposal on applying advisory attribute to "aut-num" object

[Elise Gerich <]

Hi Curtis,

>Curtis Villamizar writes:
> 
> Please don't expend any effort in this direction.  We have been
> hesitant to make any announcements since in the past our target dates
> have come an gone with no elimination of the advisories.  I've just
> done some checking, and we are now ready to commit to deployment within
> two week.
> 
> For over a month we have been generating configurations on our
> development machine in which there is a perfect match between the
> advisory based configs and those generated using policy expressed in
> the autnum.  We have been unable to resolve all of the differences
> between the configs we use in production and the development configs.
> The primary problem has been that there are bugs in the version of
> radbserver that Merit is running.  Though we have fixed our copy of
> radbserver and provided patches, Merit has not yet applied them.
> There are over a thousand differences, which is two high a number to
> be resolved manually.
> 

Merit has a version of the radbserver which implements some of
the fixes that ANS has proposed.  ANS generously provided patches
for using the radbserver with perl4 and db, but the radbserver
is running under perl5.  That slowed down the adoption of the
fixes.

          --Elise