Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...

["Sean M. Doran" <smd () clock org>]

rja () corp home net (Ran Atkinson) writes:

> Letting LSR in two hops lets outsiders trying to debug (e.g. some
> routing problem) at least perform first-level fault-isolation
> so they know whose NOC to call for further debugging assistance.
> So I view the 2-hop notion as an attempt at "reasonable
> compromise".

Cool, and I now view the 2-hop notion as the first
reasonable argument for encouraging people to totally
flatten their network into a full mesh.

Security policy should not under any circumstances prevent
the Internet as a whole from functioning reasonably well,
scaling decently, or make discovering and diagnosing
problems any harder than it already is.

Your opinion may vary with mine, but I am solidly in line
with Randy's suggestion that enabling LSRR on backbone
routers should be a requirement for peering.  (This is not
surprising as I used to require it of a couple of peers in
a previous life, because in practice it is unfortunately
an irreplaceable diagnostic tool).

        Sean.