<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html"/>
</head>
<body>
<div style="color: black;">
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Hi Job, et al,</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Let's please keep it required.
Many people rely on PDB information to automate peering configurations. It
does not happen often that we need to configure peering sessions that
require manual input and when it happens, it is actually annoying. Making
IP addresses optional will make more ASes not document them either of
lazyness or weird security reasons. If someone thinks not disclosing them
gives extra security they do have a problem anyway. It's easy to find out
peering LAN IPs if someone wants to do something ugly.</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Please keep them required.</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Merry xmas<br>
Sascha</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black; font-family: sans-serif;"></p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black; font-family: sans-serif;">On 25.
December 2016 13:33:04 Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black; font-family: sans-serif;">>
Perhaps a different way of phrasing the question:<br>
><br>
> When you indicate you are a participant of an IXP, should entering an
IP address be optional?<br>
><br>
> Kind regards,<br>
><br>
> Job<br>
><br>
> On 25 Dec 2016, 12:39 +0100, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>,
wrote:<br>
>> Hi all,<br>
>><br>
>> Sometimes people want to disclose their presence at an Internet<br>
>> Exchange, but don't want to disclose their IP address.<br>
>><br>
>> Should PeeringDB allow the IPv4 and IPv6 field to be either of the<br>
>> following?<br>
>><br>
>> "a valid globally unique IP address"<br>
>> "" (empty)<br>
>><br>
>> Or should PDB only accept valid globally unique IP addresses as
value<br>
>> for the IP Field?<br>
>><br>
>> It appears we've gone back and forth between allowing empty and
not<br>
>> allowing empty as is visible here: <a
href="https://www.peeringdb.com/ix/1138">https://www.peeringdb.com/ix/1138</a><br>
>> (currently empty is not allowed).<br>
>><br>
>> An argument against 'empty' is that from an automation perspective
the<br>
>> 'empty' value is quite useless.<br>
>><br>
>> Based on the outcome of this discussion I'd like to either clean
up the<br>
>> database, or popularise the use of the 'empty ip field' where<br>
>> applicable.<br>
>><br>
>> Kind regards,<br>
>><br>
>> Job<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ----------<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Pdb-tech mailing list<br>
> Pdb-tech@lists.peeringdb.com<br>
> <a
href="http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech">http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech</a><br>
</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>