nanog mailing list archives
Re: link avoidance
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew () matthew at>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 16:41:01 -0700
On 5/6/2015 3:56 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
a fellow researcher wants > to make the case that in some scenarios it is very important for a > network operator to be able to specify that traffic should *not* > traverse a certain switch/link/group of switches/group of links > (that's true right?). Could you give some examples? Perhaps point > me to relevant references? if so, why? security? congestion? other? but is it common? and, if so, how do you do it? randy
I don't think it is common, but I have a microwave network made up of a combination of license-free links and amateur radio band links (where no commercial traffic is permitted). For now the ham-band links are stubs, so that's easy. But we're looking at using MPLS with link coloring so that as we do start to get redundant paths available, we can ensure that non-ham-radio traffic stays off the ham-band links.
Matthew Kaufman
Current thread:
- link avoidance Randy Bush (May 06)
- Re: link avoidance William Herrin (May 06)
- Re: link avoidance Matthew Kaufman (May 06)
- Re: link avoidance Jimmy Hess (May 06)
- Re: link avoidance Owen DeLong (May 06)
- Re: link avoidance Christopher Morrow (May 06)
- Re: link avoidance Scott Whyte (May 06)
- [no subject] Steve Dodd via NANOG (May 07)