Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Ping flooding

  • From: Alan Hannan
  • Date: Thu Jul 11 21:58:24 1996

  Vadim,

] 2) Don't Do Any Dynamic Routing Where Only One Path Exists.

  Certainly I would not agree with this rule.

  If I have a tail router that is down, I do not want to send
  traffic to him, when he is not there to receive it.  Rather, I
  would want my intermediate router to reject it right off.
  Furthermore, I do not want to extend nondynamic notification in my
  network.

------------------------ = ------------------------
Network:

      rtra --------+-------+
                   |       |
      rtrb --------+ rtrd  +--------- rtre ------- rtrf
                   |       |
      rtrc --------+-------+
------------------------ = ------------------------

  If rtra is down, I do not want rtre to send packets to rtrd to get
  to rtra, do I?  Wouldn't I prefer them to be stopped ASAP?

  Certainly this is a debatable point.

* Another situation is what happens when you renumber networks?
  What hapens when you've large number of downstream networks?  Do
  you really want static routes in rtrf for all networks attached to
  rtrs a,b,c,d,e?

  What I find, is that in running a "large" network, filtered
  dynamic routing is far preferrable to either static leaf nodes, or
  unfiltered dynamic routing.

  I want my dynamic routing to be binary: what I should get, or
  nothing.

  -alan

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.