[8177] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: consistent policy != consistent announcements
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Schwartz)
Fri Mar 14 12:37:48 1997
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 12:19:44 -0500 (EST)
From: David Schwartz <djls@gate.net>
To: Alan Barrett <apb@iafrica.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970314090504.162U-100000@apb.iafrica.com>
On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Alan Barrett wrote:
> The topology we are discussing:
>
> M
> / \
> A B * Peer link
> | * | Customer link
> RRRRRRR
> Point1 * * Point2
> VVVVVVV
>
> M might very well have requested R to consider the paths "R A M" and "R
> B M" to be equally good, and M doesn't care that A is a customer of R
> but B is not a customer of R. It's perfectly reasonable for R to accede
> to M's wishes in this regard.
M and A have no direct relationship in this picture so I don't
see why M would be making requests to R. R should normally be preferring
customer links to peer links.
I think it's reasonable of V to demand that if R wishes to treat
M in such an unusual way, R consider all of M's routes customer routes.
Otherwise R cannot present a consistent picture to V because R's policy
is not consistent (preferring a customer route on one side and a peer
route on the other).
DS
