[15900] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: consistency and cix
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Fri Mar 27 17:53:20 1998
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 14:39:18 -0800 (PST)
To: nanog@merit.edu
> V peers with X at a number of points. V and X announce the same routes
> to each other at all these points.
>
> V and X are also members of the CIX and are announcing routes to the CIX
> router. X announces different routes to the CIX router than they
> announce directly to peer V because Y pays X to specifically announce
> Y's routes at the CIX.
>
> Should V be unhappy with X's inconsistent route announcements? Should
> X's announcement via the CIX be consistent with their announcements at
> the other points V and X meet?
>
> o yes, because the CIX is a peering point, though router-based (this
> in itself may be worth a different discussion).
>
> o no, because in realty V and X each are paying customers of the CIX,
> and the CIX is merely announcing their customers' routes to each
> other.
Please note the evidently subtle point that, in this last case, any peering
contract between V and X is not really applicable because this is not a
peering relationship. I.e. surely any peering contract between V and X
would not place terms or conditions on each other's possible relationship
to, for example, MCI.
randy
