[6996] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: withdrawal propagation (was E.E. Times?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Neil J. McRae)
Wed Jan 15 06:35:09 1997
To: "Justin W. Newton" <justin@erols.com>
cc: jon@branch.net (Jon Zeeff), young@mci.net (Jeff Young),
wsimpson@greendragon.com, nanog@merit.edu, neil@domino.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:32:03 EST."
<3.0.32.19970114153202.00afb964@justin.erols.com>
From: "Neil J. McRae" <neil@domino.org>
Reply-To: "Neil J. McRae" <neil@domino.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:23:38 +0000
On Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:32:03 -0500
"Justin W. Newton" <justin@erols.com> wrote:
> A BGP withdrawl for a route which is not in the routing table does not
> cause the router to update any routes and is hence not a routing update.
> I.e. removing a route that isn't there is not very processor intensive.
Thats irrelevent, what it is doing is _broken_ and it should be fixed and
implemented.
Neil.
--
Neil J. McRae. Alive and Kicking. Domino: In the glow of the night.
neil@DOMINO.ORG NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor)
Free the daemon in your <A HREF="http://www.NetBSD.ORG/">computer!</A>
