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: consistent policy != consistent announcements

  • From: David Schwartz
  • Date: Fri Mar 14 12:30:18 1997

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Alan Barrett wrote:

> The topology we are discussing:
> 
>                     M
>                   /   \
>                  A     B      * Peer link
>                  |     *      | Customer link
>                  RRRRRRR
>           Point1 *     * Point2
>                  VVVVVVV
> 
> M might very well have requested R to consider the paths "R A M" and "R
> B M" to be equally good, and M doesn't care that A is a customer of R
> but B is not a customer of R.  It's perfectly reasonable for R to accede
> to M's wishes in this regard.

	M and A have no direct relationship in this picture so I don't 
see why M would be making requests to R. R should normally be preferring 
customer links to peer links.

	I think it's reasonable of V to demand that if R wishes to treat 
M in such an unusual way, R consider all of M's routes customer routes. 
Otherwise R cannot present a consistent picture to V because R's policy 
is not consistent (preferring a customer route on one side and a peer 
route on the other).

	DS

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




Discussion Communities


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


Merit Network, Inc.