North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: Peering Policies and Route Servers
- From: Tim Salo
- Date: Tue Apr 30 12:37:49 1996
> To: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
> Subject: Re: Peering Policies and Route Servers
> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 10:49:02 -0400
> From: Enke Chen <enke@mci.net>
> [...]
> Regarding the RS (I have many friends there, and they have done many
> good work), let me echo the fundamental issues that Steve Heimlich
> has pointed out, would you rather have your peering policy enforced by
> yourself or by a third party? Would you rather develop a dependency
> on a third party (which may not be there a few years down the road)
> to deliver the critical service or depend on yourself?
This sounds like an argument for an NSP to build their own routers.
(Oh,I forgot, that has already been tried...)
More seriously, I would like to think that the analysis performed by
the NSPs is a bit more detailed. Perhaps the challenges include:
o the routing arbiter not having a long-term track record as a vendor
against which to compare internal efforts, or as you mention
an uncertain future;
o the route servers don't save an NSP all that much work;
o the NSPs haven't bothered to do the analysis; or
o ...
-tjs
-tjs
|
