ANNOUNCEMENT: NANOG 9 Date Change (fwd)
Robert Laughlin
robert at portal.dx.net
Tue Nov 26 16:11:24 UTC 1996
I vote for Avi description of the topic.
Robert
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DataXchange sales: 800-863-1550 http://www.dx.net
Network Operations Center: 703-903-7412 -or- 888-903-7412
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 26 Nov 1996, R. Eric Bennett wrote:
> > At 9:37 AM 11/26/96, Avi Freedman wrote:
> >
> > > Route reflecting sounds like a good topic - could I interest any of you
> > > in presenting on it?
> >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Susan R. Harris, Ph.D. Merit Network, Inc. srh at merit.edu
> >
> > I would be willing to present, though as I said I think a separate meeting
> > to see what people really want is needed.
> >
> > I think the issues are:
> >
> > o (Briefly) The politics and technology of peering
> > o Easier peering between multiple parties: MLPA
> > o Since no NAP operator is going to enforce an MLPA, how can peering between
> > multiple willing parties still be made to happen with less people time
> > involved in the setup?
> > o Why might the RA not be the best tool - or why might it be?
> > o Possible goal:
> > o Participants sign a contract expressing a desire to peer with anyone
> > else signing the contract (not exclusively) through a route-reflecting
> > box.
> > o You can only offer routes for you and "your customers" via this. No
> > partial transit to specific people can be offered.
> > o Boxes at each interesting exchange point that people can then peer with
> > to effect the agreement. One or two Cisco 2501s would work fine, but
> > RA-type boxes which can "hide" their ASs in the middle might be
> > interesting as well (Peter Lothberg arguments about BGP not being
> > designed to 'work that way' possibly put aside).
> > o Filtering:
> > o Box-side filtering to enforce sanity?
> > o Concerns
> > o Who's going to run the thing?
> > o Network stability?
> > o What happens to control bad neighbors?
> >
> > Or, perhaps a separate mailing list is needed in the interim to allow
> > people to discuss the issue without boring uninterested members of
> > the nanog list...
>
> While your outline sounds great wrt its chosen topic, the topic doesn't
> sound like what I consider to be route-reflecting -- specifically, route
> reflection in (i)BGP. Your outline sounds more like "politics and
> operational issues surrounding peering and route-serving at a NAP." Can
> someone clarify which of the two topics is the burning topic that people
> would like presented?
>
> Note that both topics may be burning issues and worthy of a presentation at
> the next NANOG...
>
> thanks,
> eric
>
> ----
> R. Eric Bennett <reb at ieng.com> | Internet Engineering Group
> 313-669-8800 (v) 313-669-8661 (f) | 122 S. Main, Suite 280
> http://www.ieng.com/ | Ann Arbor, MI 48104
> "Radical Rodent: Superdynamic Rodent of Tomorrow"
> -- http://home.earthlink.net/~krhughes/Rat.html
>
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list