nanog mailing list archives
Re: oh k can you see
From: Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg () ripe net>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:00:07 +0100
On 01.11 05:41, Randy Bush wrote:
mornin' daniel:
ev'nin randy: Of course the NCC takes resposibility for the K anycast deployment including the way we announce BGP routes to K. We also clearly describe and announce what we do. We cannot take responsibility for what others do with that routing information; we cannot because we have no control over and little way of knowing what they do. We are doing the best we can; hence this conversation. We are considering to add a covering prefix announced from global nodes relatively quickly. This should solve the particular problem and we cannot (yet) see any problems it would create. But this is more complex than the current state and thus brings us further away from salvation ;-). If there are reasons not to do this, please let us know. We are also considering seriously to treat "local" nodes and global nodes the same routing wise wherever possible. This will be done one-by-one wiht the proper announcements and concurrent measurements. My poersonal hope is that we can do this for all K nodes and thus remove all BGP cleverness that originates from us. This does not mean that all cleverness concerning K's routes would be removed though. Daniel
Current thread:
- Re: oh k can you see Daniel Karrenberg (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Randy Bush (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Daniel Karrenberg (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Steve Gibbard (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Randy Bush (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Daniel Karrenberg (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Stephen J. Wilcox (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Joe Abley (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Stephen J. Wilcox (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Randy Bush (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Joe Abley (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Bill Woodcock (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Randy Bush (Nov 01)
- Re: oh k can you see Randy Bush (Nov 01)