North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: Comments
- From: bmanning
- Date: Mon Sep 12 14:05:20 1994
- Posted-date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 11:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
>> Actually, I think the RA (in the context of coordinated routing registries
>> and route servers) does provide a gain. Virtually all the RIPE papers (ripe81
>> and derivitives) indicate that a common route registry will become a critical
>> component in the internet. (RIPE has had a functioning RS @ mae-east for
>> a number of years now) The use of such services has several advantages,
>> including reducing the number of peers that you MUST peer with. None of this
>> precludes your ability to set up as many bilateral arraingments as you as an
>> ISP, feel you need.
>
> Please be careful about mixing route registries and route servers. I
> think each serves different purposes & different arguements can be made
> for the usefulness of each.
>
> I presonally am not yet sure of the usefulness of route servers.
> However I do think that route registries are very useful.
> --asp@uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)
>
I tried to keep it clear, although it can be very confusing. As a point
of clarification, is the RIPE engine at mae-e a registry or server?
(feel free to jump right in here martin/tony)
--
--bill
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
