[13248] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Problems with specific routing policies for each exchange point
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kevin Oberman)
Fri Oct 31 12:22:01 1997
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net>, nanog@merit.net, oberman@es.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 31 Oct 97 08:25:00 PST."
<m0xRJtP-0007zWC@rip.psg.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 97 08:33:59 -0800
From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 97 08:25 PST
> From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
>
> One can use the same AS-macro in the inet-rtr.rs(in|out): as in a policy in
> aut-num.as-(in|out):.
I was not questioning the function, only the requirement. It seems
that if the problem exist between NAPNET and GENUITY, it might exist
elsewhere and changing to the specific ASes would be a simple fix.
Are there cases where an AS macro would be really beneficial in the
inet-rtr.rs-(in|out) statements?
Frankly, it's paranoia that causes me to only put specific ASes in the
statements. While I'm willing to let an ISP tell me what ASes they are
carrying, I want to know exactly with whom I'm exchanging routes.
I always thought of Randy as the conservative type, but maybe not as
much as I.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
