Wouldn’t the IX website list the IP address anyway? Also, how hard is it to crawl the in-addr for the IX block?
IOW: What good is pulling it from PDB? The IP address is going to be trivially findable anyway. -- TTFN, patrick > On Dec 26, 2016, at 1:32 PM, Eric Loos <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don’t really see a valid use case for wanting to ‘hide’ a presence at a > PUBLIC internet exchange. If you don’t want to peer, that is what the peering > policy field is for, to give people a hint that they shouldn’t be bothering > you. The prime desire expressed by the users of PDB was to increase the data > quality. In that sense, an entity in my view is only *at* an exchange, if it > has an IP address there. Perhaps I am not seeing all the use case, so I > really would like to hear from the people wanting to keep the field empty for > other reasons than signalling prospective peers, I hope security is not a > drive since that doesn’t really make sense. > It could be that people want to signal their intent to prospective peers that > they will be at an exchange, but this is a different use case and might be > better served in another way. > > Kind regards, > > Eric > > >> On 25 Dec 2016, at 19:26, Joe Provo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> [this time form the correct address...] >> >> On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 03:15:39PM +0100, Sascha Pollok wrote: >>> Hi Job, et al, >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> Please keep them required. >> >> Yes. >> >> If the [not uncommon] case of signaling intent-to-be-there is needed, >> that should be simply a separate flag not an overloading of the address >> field. >> >> Cheers! >> >> Joe >> >> -- >> Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header. >> Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling >> _______________________________________________ >> Pdb-tech mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech > > _______________________________________________ > Pdb-tech mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech
_______________________________________________ Pdb-tech mailing list [email protected] http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-tech
