North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1?
In message <[email protected]>, Vadim Antonov writes: > >Is PGP secure enough for you? > > Secure _telnet_. Oh come on now. Both support an strongly encrypted form of authentication. > >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. > --vadim Curtis