[46399] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean M. Doran)
Tue Mar 26 17:06:31 2002
To: hank@att.net.il, woody@zocalo.net
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-Id: <20020326220453.DD454C7925@cesium.clock.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 14:04:53 -0800 (PST)
From: smd@clock.org (Sean M. Doran)
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
| This isn't something I really care to make a big argument of, but my point
| was that for many ISPs, the path will go from:
|
| SELF - EXODUS
|
| to:
|
| SELF - OTHER BACKBONE - C&W
|
| for a net increase in average path length.
Are we talking AS_Path attributes here? If so, all this means
is that now we don't announce OTHER BACKBONE routes to C&W/EXODUS,
which we probably weren't doing anyway.
Or are we talking forwarding paths, which are _different_ (and not
necessarily stable even in the presence of perfect AS_Path stability)?
If so, have we added any bottlenecks or sources of packet corruption?
If none have been added, a change in the number of links and routers
traversed is meaningless.
(Note that it is possible that the number of links and routers DECREASES).
Sean.
