nanog mailing list archives

Re: Verio Decides what parts of the internet to drop


From: James Smith <jsmith () dxstorm com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:28:16 -0500 (EST)


I would imagine some sort of Internet Authority on Routing.  There are
already quite a few authorities for other such things on the Net.  But
perhaps a better solution would be for everyone to register with a Routing
Authority.  We already require any one that wants to use a domain name to
register, and if you want a block of IP space or a BGP number you have to
register with ARIN.  I realize there are registries like RADB and RIPE,
but these don't seem to be used to their full potential.  Some backbone
providers still enter in route filters manually, which seems a little
obsolete considering the number of routes being advertised. 


--
James Smith, CCNA
Network/System Administrator
DXSTORM.COM

http://www.dxstorm.com/

DXSTORM Inc.
2140 Winston Park Drive, Suite 203
Oakville, ON, CA L6H 5V5         
Tel:   905-829-3389 (email preferred)
Fax:  905-829-5692
1-877-DXSTORM (1-877-397-8676)

It's Unix or nothing!

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Scott Huddle wrote:

required by whom?

-scott

At 01:11 PM 12/06/1999 -0500, James Smith wrote:

Based on past experiences, I would say that the big backbone providers
shouldn't do any filtering at all.  Then, the lower tiers can do all the
filtering they want, and still rely on default routing to send the packets
to the backbone.  It may not be the prettiest way to route traffic, but
this would allow smaller ISPs to filter if they cannot afford buying
bigger equipment to hold all the routes.  Since the tier-1 guys are the
glue of the Internet, they should be required to take everyone routes.



--
James Smith, CCNA
Network/System Administrator
DXSTORM.COM

http://www.dxstorm.com/

DXSTORM Inc.
2140 Winston Park Drive, Suite 203
Oakville, ON, CA L6H 5V5
Tel:   905-829-3389 (email preferred)
Fax:  905-829-5692
1-877-DXSTORM (1-877-397-8676)

It's Unix or nothing!

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Andrew Bender wrote:


Dr. Li wrote:
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 23:35:18 -0800
From: Tony Li <tony1 () home net>
Subject: Re: Verio Decides what parts of the internet to drop

I'll also note that this would also decrease the pressure on the address
space.  No need to go get a /19 if I can get my /23 globally advertised.
:
:
The correlation with route flap should be re-examined.  I suspect 
that this
is no longer a driving force and is more than adequately compensated 
for by
having flap damping parameters that scale geometrically with the prefix
length.

To state an obvious extension of these ideas:

Without relief, space registrants are thus incented to (continue to) 
subvert the
spirit of the allocation scheme in order to overcome its deficiencies. 
In doing
so, a trend toward lower (shorter) "characteristic prefix length" is 
created by
networks that would otherwise be suited by smaller allocations closer 
to their
actual occupancy.

Metastability in interdomain routing is currently maintained by an 
algorithm [1]
that suppresses oscillations to an acceptable level, deferring treatment of
another "interesting problem" [2,3]. If distinctions between highly 
aggregated
networks and large, underoccupied ones are progressively obscured, 
strategies
that inversely correlate prefix length with oscillatory period may be
circumvented.

Past experience [*] suggests that further detraction from the elusive 
"global
routing stability" is more poignant and at greater issue to operators 
than the
combined problems of address occupancy and table population.

Indeed, it seems that a review of operational policy is in order.

Regards,
Andrew Bender
Total Network Solutions, Inc.

[1] C. Villamizar, R. Chandra, R. Govindan. RFC 2439.
[2] K. Varadhan, R. Govindan, and D. Estrin. Persistent route 
oscillations in
inter-domain routing. USC/Information Sciences Institute, 1996.
[3] T. Griffin, G. Wilfong. An Analysis of BGP Convergence Properties. 
Computer
Communication Review, October 1999.
[*] http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19991202S0002









Current thread: