[1725] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
An interesting question from can.canet.d
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joachim Martillo @ azea)
Mon Dec 16 04:09:24 1991
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 91 04:02:14 EST
From: martillo@azea.clearpoint.com (Joachim Martillo @ azea)
To: moraes@cs.toronto.edu
Cc: com-priv@psi.com, martillo@azea.clearpoint.com
In-Reply-To: Mark Moraes's message of Mon, 16 Dec 1991 03:33:21 -0500 <91Dec16.033343est.6844@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
From: moraes@cs.toronto.edu (Mark Moraes)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1991 03:33:21 -0500
Newsgroups: can.canet.d
>From: daniel@nstn.ns.ca (Daniel MacKay)
Subject: Policy routing end-user support
Original-Message-Id: <1991Dec13.165442.14453@nstn.ns.ca>
Message-ID: <1991Dec13.165620.6932@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Apparently-To: canet-d@canet.ca
Sender: postmaster@utcs.utoronto.ca
Original-To: <canet-d@canet.ca>
Organization: NSTN Network Operations Centre, Nova Scotia, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 16:54:42 GMT
Approved: postmaster@utcs.utoronto.ca
Hello!
More and more often, policy routing is causing support incidents. Users,
even Internet-literate ones, will know an address, say, "dialog.com" and
will assume they should be able to connect to it. They end up very
frustrated, and call their support people for help.
I have not been following this discussion very closely, but isn't the
issue here policy-based filtering, which can prevent IP packets from
reaching or traversing a given segment, rather than policy-based routing
which uses a policy of some sort as an intrinsic part of some metric
according to which routes for IP packets are selected?
-dan
--
Daniel MacKay daniel@nstn.ns.ca
NOC Manager, NSTN Operations Centre 902-494-NSTN
Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
