nanog mailing list archives
Re: Communities
From: Bradley Dunn <bradley () dunn org>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 23:16:48 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 2 Nov 1997, James A. Farrar wrote:
It would seem to me to be helpful when coming up with policy to route traffic bound for internal/customer networks of an upstream to that upstream (unless that link is down). Sometimes the path selection does not allow this and we are forced to use foolish kludges like as path prepending and other neanderthalic clubbings.MCI offers announcemnets of: Backbone Routes Customer Routes Customer Routes - w/MED Full Routes Full Routes - w/MED
Here is the kicker: How about Full Routes with Backbone and Customer Routes tagged with a community denoting their status? Bradley
Current thread:
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Tim Salo (Nov 01)
- Communities Bradley Reynolds (Nov 01)
- Re: Communities Kirby Files (Nov 01)
- Re: Communities Bradley Reynolds (Nov 02)
- Re: Communities Sean M. Doran (Nov 03)
- Message not available
- Re: Communities James A. Farrar (Nov 02)
- Re: Communities Bradley Dunn (Nov 05)
- Re: Communities Kirby Files (Nov 01)
- Communities Bradley Reynolds (Nov 01)
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 02)
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Alan Hannan (Nov 02)
- Message not available
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 02)
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Sean M. Doran (Nov 03)
- Message not available
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 03)
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Yakov Rekhter (Nov 03)
- Message not available
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 03)
- Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful) Eric M. Carroll (Nov 03)