nanog mailing list archives
Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements
From: Vadim Antonov <avg () pluris com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 02:38:57 -0800
Randy Bush wrote:
A normal condition of peering between consenting adults is that the peers have consistent policy across all points where they peer.
[example of a quasi-consistent scenario skipped]
Am I being unfair to my peers? Would they be justified in making a stronger requirement than 'consistent' policy? What requirement would be reasonable?
There are three quasi-answers: 1) it's ok with consent of parties involved (i.e. you may want to coordinate fancy policies with peers) 2) generally speaking, BGP path length is too blunt an instrument. More fine-grained control is needed to allow peers to fine-tune balance of their interests. I'm sorry to be too naive, but i'm repeating that for years and nobody seems to agree that BGP needs real metrics. How come? 3) on a phylosophical level, all involved parties should have a way to control destiny of routes, to a some extent. Right now, it's either control local to the destination (local preferences), or control by adjacent neighbour (MEDs). There's no way to extend it further (save for as-replication kludgery) or to combine local and remote metrics in any meaningful way. --vadim - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- consistent policy != consistent announcements Randy Bush (Mar 12)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements John W. Stewart III (Mar 13)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Vadim Antonov (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Tony Barber (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Randy Bush (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Tony Li (Mar 16)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Sean Donelan (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Randy Bush (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements John Scudder (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Vince Fuller (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Henry Kilmer (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements David Schwartz (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements the Riz (Mar 13)
- Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements Henry Kilmer (Mar 13)
(Thread continues...)