nanog mailing list archives
Re: Asymmetric Routing
From: "Steven J. Richardson" <sjr () merit edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 15:13:40 -0400
Sean: This is misleading at best... >From list-admin () merit edu Fri Oct 20 15:19:42 1995 >From: Sean Doran <smd () icp net> >To: joliveto () cwi net, nanog () merit edu >Subject: Re: Asymmetric Routing >Message-Id: <95Oct20.142237-0400_edt.20696+16 () chops icp net> >Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 14:22:35 -0400 >Status: R > >| Analysis of some of our routes shows the potential for asymmetric >| routing...that is...the transmit path will be different than the return path >| for packets. > >Asymmetry has been a reality for quite some time now; in fact >it was happening during the NSFNET backbone service days, >since the information in the PRDB was often in a shambles. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Not surprisingly, the PRDB was as good as the information which was submitted by customers of the NSFNET BNS, though there was a lot of checking done to try to proactively catch mistakes. As someone who was working with/supporting the NSFNET configuration process, I do not know of other customers claiming that "the PRDB was often in a shambles" via phone, email, or third-party reports. > Sean. Steve Richardson, Merit
Current thread:
- Asymmetric Routing joliveto (Oct 18)
- Re: Asymmetric Routing Curtis Villamizar (Oct 18)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Asymmetric Routing Sean Doran (Oct 20)
- Re: Asymmetric Routing Steven J. Richardson (Oct 23)