nanog mailing list archives
Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone)
From: "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson () greendragon com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 16:42:24 GMT
From: "Erik E. Fair" (Internet Architect) <fair () apple com> Perhaps the easy way out is to suggest that educating the ISPs as to what constitutes good behavior at an exchange (routing system stability and reliable packet delivery) is the responsibility of the exchange operators,
This is not just the easy way out, I believe that it is the only way out. Then, we don't have the problem of all those multiple peering agreements. Instead, just one with the exchange. Also, this eliminates the problem of each ISP trying to "filter" bogus routes. Instead, the exchange operators will handle that problem. Indeed, I think that this is/was a major impetus for "policy-based" routing in the first place (reading the old RFCs), and a clear reason we need the Routing Arbiter!
and it might even be possible to enforce some interesting policies in that regard in the route servers (e.g. if you have more than N routing or BGP peer transitions per time period, the route server will refuse to peer with you for 48 hours - think of it as the hold-down or damper from Hell).
Interesting concept!
I certainly think that to the extent that the exchange operators can measure such things as routing and peer stability, it is in everyone's interest to see the numbers (except those ISPs who are unstable). Who knows? A series good reports from exchange operators about an ISP might lead to offers of private peering arrangements outside of the exchange, to the benefit of the ISP. Similar to the way that having a good credit record seems to lead to endless offers of more credit.
I understood that the RA contract provided for these measurements, and agree that they would be a good thing! WSimpson () UMich edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32 BSimpson () MorningStar com Key fingerprint = 2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3 59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2
Current thread:
- The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) William Allen Simpson (Apr 14)
- Some corrections Dorian Kim (Apr 14)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Jeremy Porter (Apr 14)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Paul Frommeyer (Apr 15)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Erik E. Fair (Apr 14)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Justin W. Newton (Apr 15)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) William Allen Simpson (Apr 15)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Jeremy Porter (Apr 16)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) William Allen Simpson (Apr 15)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Jeremy Porter (Apr 16)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Avi Freedman (Apr 16)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Jeremy Porter (Apr 16)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) EDS (Apr 16)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Curtis Villamizar (Apr 17)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Paul Ferguson (Apr 16)
- Re: The Attitude (was: the Internet Backbone) Paul Ferguson (Apr 16)