[43512] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Communities
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Tue Oct 16 20:35:48 2001
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 17:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@exigengroup.com>
To: Kevin Gannon <kgannon@lancomms.ie>
Cc: "'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4159668C5AA7D4118A40001083FD7042568472@ccgate.lancomms.ie>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110161732360.15310-100000@arch.exigengroup.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Kevin Gannon wrote:
> Using dynamic data for this is not going to work in BGP, so this would
> have to be static information (hm, packet loss is not too static,
> hopefully).
Injecting dynamic data into a routing system already strained by the
_static_ information is going to kill it. It is as simple as that.
> Introducing "metrics" like this like this is not contrary to BGP design
> philosophy: the way in which an AS selects the best route is not defined
> in the RFC and the length of the AS path is certainly not the best
> possible criterion.
Six years ago i wrote a proposal for BGP Path Metrics:
http://www.kotovnik.com/~avg/old_page/draft-bgpmetric.ps
For some reason it didn't have any effect.
--vadim
