|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Routing Registries and Route Servers
> [email protected] (Andrew Partan) writes: > > Please be careful about mixing route registries and route servers. I > think each serves different purposes & different arguments can be made > for the usefulness of each. > > I personally am not yet sure of the usefulness of route servers. > However I do think that route registries are very useful. Indeed there appears to be (too) much confusion about those two. Definitely the Routing Registry is the more important and much more general concept. Without the RR it would be difficult to impossible to configure an operational Route Server. Maybe a few informal (my personal view) definitions help: Routing Registry ---------------- Definition: A neutral repository where ISPs can register their external routing policies for retrieval by everyone needing this information. Problem addressed: The cross product of all external routing policies represents the global Internet routing policy. Without knowing a big part of this, configuration and operation of an Internet with arbitrary topology is currently impossible. Implementation: A database with a suitable schema and an Internet retrieval method. The minimal schema must represent autonomous systems, the routes being originated by those ASes and the routing information exchanged between ASes. Uses: Very many and general: Helps ISPs to configure their external routing and to diagnose unexpected routing behavior. Actually it is the *only* way to tell what the *expected* routing behavior is in very many cases. Route Server ------------ Definition: An external routing peer located at an Internet exchange point that combines dynamic routing announcements with routing policy and provides the result to its users. It does not forward any packets. There can be multiple route servers using different policies. Single route servers using multiple policies have been proposed. Use of route servers is optional. They can be used in addition to direct peerings. Problem addressed: n**2 peering problem at exchange points. ISPs can peer with just the route server and do not have to peer with any of the ISPs that the route server combines information for. This solves router capacity problems as the route server keeps many more paths, peers and isolates non significant routing changes from its users. It also reduces routing configuration maintenance. Implementation: A workstation with routing software. Most commonly (euphemism!) a Unix box with gated. Configuration is derived (partly) from Routing Registry. Uses: specialised, see above. Routing Arbiter --------------- Definition: Awardee of a NSF cooperative agreement operating a Routing Registry and Route servers at the NAPs. Problem Addressed: see above Implementation: see above Uses: server those connected at the NAPs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|