Has PSI been assigned network 1?
curtis at ans.net
Thu Apr 20 03:31:52 UTC 1995
In message <199504192303.TAA20617 at titan.sprintlink.net>, Vadim Antonov writes:
> >Is PGP secure enough for you?
> Secure _telnet_.
Oh come on now. Both support an strongly encrypted form of
> >RIPE-181; it's different.
> Not that much. I used RIPE-81 as a generic name. In general case
> routing policies which can be implemented by border routers _cannot_ be
> implemented in a central box interfacing those border boxes -- simply
> because those boxes may have (and do have) exterior peering sessions on
> other links/LANs. A large part of routing policies (particularly between
> US and Europe) is implemented as intricate interior weighting systems
> between announcements from different sides.
Yes.. The protocols support LOCAL_PREF and MED. RIPE-181 has cost,
perf applied on a per peering seesion basis and support for MED.
> Whoever wants to play with it can have our ICM-DC-1 configuration,
> just to try to represent what it does in RIPE-181 format.
You really need to look at your AS as a whole, not just one config
file. It isn't a one to one translation to Cisco configs. But sure.
Send it anyway (but not to the list).
> In any case, my point is that RADB has to be provider-friendly to
> be successful.
They are trying to be provider friendly.
More information about the NANOG