North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Global BGP community values?
Yes, i agree (actually, the BGP with metrics per that document is compatible with currently deployed BGP) - but isn't it better to provide a real fix and get rid of several kludges at once? --vadim To: Vadim Antonov <[email protected]>, [email protected] From: Hank Nussbacher <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Global BGP community values? At 23:39 04/10/99 -0700, Vadim Antonov wrote: The difference is your proposal requires changes to the BGP protocol (new optional transitive attribute), whereas mine piggybacks on the existing community attribute - thereby being able to be implemented tomorrow as opposed to some months/years from now. -Hank > >I proposed real metrics for BGP long time ago. Back then >the idea didn't find any support -- apparently few people >felt it was needed. > >The mechanism described in the draft is stragightforward and significantly >more powerful than the community attribute usage proposed by Hank - and >also can do everything MED and LOCAL_PREF can do, so these can >be retired. > >Here's the URL: http://www.civd.com/~avg > >--vadim > >-------------------------------------------------- >Hank Nussbacher <[email protected]> wrote: > >I think everyone at one point or another has tried to influence incoming >data flows via BGP. About the only tool available to influence the BGP >decisions in far away places is via AS-PATH length. This turns out to be >a fairly never-ending iterative process - that at best achieves 80% of its >intention. It also doesn't allow for accurate decision making. As an >alternative, neighboring ISPs and their customers usually design some BGP >community system which is then used to influence the BGP decision process. > >Why can't this be extended globally [if this has already been done and >written up in some BCP RFC - just point it out to me]? What if we all >agreed that if some community value of say 1000000-2000000 [example] is >seen, then those community values are to take precedence above all other >metrics. 1000001 could mean - "this is the best path for me - always send >pkts this way no matter what the other metrics might say". We could build >up a table of these global community strings. ISPs that don't use it - no >harm done. But the more ISPs (tier 1 & 2) that do use it - the better the >end customer and ISPs have on influencing data flow. > >Comments welcome. > >Hank Nussbacher > >