Re: Strange information in different routing regestries?

[Andrei Robachevsky <]

Vladimir A. Jakovenko wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 04:59:05PM +0100, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
>
> > > Subj:	Strange information in different routing regestries?
> > Well, "strange" ... ?
> >
> > Some organisations decided to run Routing Registries in order to support
> > their mission and/or their own operational environment. 
> > In general, there is no mechanism to synchronise duplicate or multiple
> > parallel entries when an update is made to _one_ of the registries.
> There could be at least one mechanism to prevent creation of duplicate/wrong
> records in Routing Registries - to limit creation of entries only to limited 
> set of inetnum/as-num ranges.
>
>
> > It is up to the user/maintainer of a certain block of addresses (or his
> > or her up-stream ISP(s)) to (manually) keep those entries up-to-date or
> > to get them removed - whatever is appropriate.
> Sorry for may be so stupid question, but are there any documents which 
> describe relations between Routing Registries, Regional Internet Registries 
> and ICANN in the view of one distributed, non contradicted Routing Policies
> Database ?
You may want to have a look at RFC2725 and RFC2769.

The RIPE Database implements the first one.

Regards,


Andrei Robachevsky
RIPE NCC


> > > Is this normal?
> > I wouldn't dare to classify what you c/should regard as normal" :-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > _________________________________:_____________________________________
> > Wilfried Woeber                 : e-mail: Woeber@localhost
> > UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33
> > Universitaetsstrasse 7          : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140
> > A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe  : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~