[8166] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Schwartz)
Thu Mar 13 16:11:42 1997
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 16:00:41 -0500 (EST)
From: David Schwartz <djls@gate.net>
To: Vince Fuller <vaf@valinor.barrnet.net>
Cc: "John W. Stewart III" <jstewart@isi.edu>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <CMM.0.90.2.858282145.vaf@valinor.barrnet.net>
On Thu, 13 Mar 1997, Vince Fuller wrote:
> What we are seeing, though, is "R A M" at Point1 and nothing at Point2, likely
> because Randy doesn't consider "R B M", received from one of his peers, to be
> a customer route.
Ahh, now that's another story. That is something it is reasonable
for a peer to object to. If you are going to advertise a route to a block
at one peering point, you should be advertising a route to that block at
all peering points and with the same AS length.
It is not consistent policy to route to a customer through both
another customer and a non-customer. That's what you can't do.
Alternatively, if you do decide you must accept routes to a customer from
a non-customer, you must consider those routes to be customer routes.
Agree? Disagree?
DS
