> Of course! Including headers to show authenticity. I was very amused by the > explanation of the "chicken and egg" problem. Who's creating that? The > networks > who refuse to peer with non-peeringdb registered ASNs, or peeringdb who won't > recognize ASNs that are not peering with anyone because nobody wants to peer > with them because they are not registered in peeringdb because nobody wants to > peer with them? You get the idea.
First, most networks do not require a PDB record to peer. (Silly of them, I know, but still true.) Second, you do not need to have a PDB record to get a link to an IXP. Even membership in a free IXP is sufficient for an account in PDB, as Grizz points out below. Third, if you have an agreement, even just an email, saying a network will peer with you once you have a record, that may well suffice. Have you asked any network to peer? Private peering (because you are not on an IXP) is usually reserved for networks with more than a modicum of traffic. If your network is large enough to qualify for private peering, I have trouble believing you cannot get another network to agree to peer so you can get a record. I guess you are right, the _Peering_DB does not register “certain” networks. Those networks would be ones that do not peer. Which seems pretty obvious to me - it is literally in the name. -- TTFN, patrick > On Aug 18, 2021, at 5:50 PM, Sabri Berisha <[email protected]> wrote: > > ----- On Aug 18, 2021, at 2:21 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > >> On Aug 18, 2021, at 5:00 PM, Matthew Walster <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, 18 Aug 2021, 21:37 Sabri Berisha, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> ----- On Aug 18, 2021, at 2:46 AM, Steve Lalonde [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>>>> We always use PeeringDB data and refuse to peer with networks not in >>>>> PeeingDB >>>> >>>> You are aware that PeerinDB refuses to register certain networks, right? >>>> It is >>>> most certainly not a single source of truth. >>>> >>> Would you care to expand on this? >> >> I am extremely interested in hearing about this as well. >> >> Specific examples would be useful. > > Of course! Including headers to show authenticity. I was very amused by the > explanation of the "chicken and egg" problem. Who's creating that? The > networks > who refuse to peer with non-peeringdb registered ASNs, or peeringdb who won't > recognize ASNs that are not peering with anyone because nobody wants to peer > with them because they are not registered in peeringdb because nobody wants to > peer with them? You get the idea. > > Thanks, > > Sabri > AS31064 > > > Return-Path: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Received: from mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> (LHLO > mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/>) > (195.16.84.32) by mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> with > LMTP; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:47:22 > -0700 (PDT) > Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> (Postfix) with > ESMTP id 4CED64001EF > for <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Fri, 9 Oct > 2015 01:47:22 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> > ([127.0.0.1]) > by localhost (mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> > [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) > with ESMTP id 3TLvVaNdjHGA for <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; > Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:47:21 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from ubersmith.peeringdb.com <http://ubersmith.peeringdb.com/> > (ubersmith.peeringdb.com <http://ubersmith.peeringdb.com/> [107.6.74.106]) > by mail.cluecentral.net <http://mail.cluecentral.net/> (Postfix) with > ESMTP id C5B164001A9 > for <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Fri, 9 Oct > 2015 01:47:01 -0700 (PDT) > Received: by ubersmith.peeringdb.com <http://ubersmith.peeringdb.com/> > (Postfix, from userid 48) > id D8AF377C1A; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 04:46:29 -0400 (EDT) > Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 04:46:29 -0400 > To: Sabri Berisha <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [#9192] [PeeringDB] User (sabri) Requesting Access (New Company > - Cluecentral Inc) > Message-ID: <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > Dear PeeringDB user, > > Registering with peeringDB and peering negotiations are sort of egg and > chicken problem. We only want to have networks registered that already > do have settlement free peering. > > After some basic checks it looks like you are only buying transit from > 6939/Hurricane Electric, but are not connected to any Internet Exchange (e.g. > AMS-IX/NL-ix) yet. > > Having said this, is it acceptable to you to wait until you have your > 1st settlement free peering setup? If you already have existing peering > sessions, please provide the following details to support your request for > peeringdb access: > > Your AS number(s) > Which IXP / facilities you are peering at > Some of your peering partners (again AS numbers / name) > > Please send your answers to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> or reply to this ticket. > > > Best regards, > PeeringDB admin on Duty > > > PeeringDB Listserv information: > > PeeringDB Announce: > http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-announce > <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-announce> > > PeeringDB Governance: > http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov > <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov> > > PeeringDB Technical: > http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech > <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech> > > PeeringDB User Discuss: > http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-discuss > <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-discuss> > > -- > Florian Hibler <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > PeeringDB Administrator
