North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: NANOG 9 Date Change (fwd)
> 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. [email protected] > > 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 <[email protected]> | 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 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|