nanog mailing list archives
Re: Why Vadim likes statics
From: "Eric M. Carroll" <eric () enfm utcc utoronto ca>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 11:09:32 -0400
So we end up with a few possible outcomes (there are more...)
How about aggregates as pullups. This both makes a pseudo-static and a flap dampener. I also really like Curtis' work - I think it needs to be added to BGP4 (BGP5?) as a part of the RFC... The overall objective is that the the father away in the topology you are, the less "meaningful" those flaps are. So damp them in some distance proportional manner (AS path length?) as they move in across the Internet. Eric Carroll University of Toronto Network & Operations Services External Networking Facilities Management
Current thread:
- IAP Guidebook - help from the big guys, (continued)
- IAP Guidebook - help from the big guys Rich Roth (Apr 26)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Hank Nussbacher (Apr 23)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Randy Bush (Apr 23)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 11111111? Paul A Vixie (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Eric M. Carroll (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Michael F. Nittmann (Apr 24)
- pull-ups on route annoucements to deter route flap Alan Barrett (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Karl Denninger, MCSNet (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Andrew Partan (Apr 24)
- Why Vadim likes statics bmanning (Apr 24)
- Re: Why Vadim likes statics Eric M. Carroll (Apr 24)
- BGP vs. static routing (Re: Why Vadim likes statics) Sean Doran (Apr 24)
- Re: BGP vs. static routing (Re: Why Vadim likes statics) bmanning (Apr 25)
- Re: BGP vs. static routing (Re: Why Vadim likes statics) Paul A Vixie (Apr 25)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Randy Bush (Apr 23)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Curtis Villamizar (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Randy Bush (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Brett Watson (Apr 24)
- Re: Has PSI been assigned network 1? Paul A Vixie (Apr 24)