[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [RRG] Which Side to Control Ingress Link Selection?
It looks to me that in addition to "how" and "who" there is also a
question of "what".
What kind of path is to be selected among the alternative paths. This
implies that who ever selects a path needs to know about path
characteristics in the underlying inter domain routing system.
It may be that the priorities and weights that some of the mapping
solutions provide need to still respect the routing policies of the core
or at least be aware of them.
>From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf
>Of ext Christian Vogt
>Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 18:45
>To: Brian E Carpenter
>Cc: William Herrin; Routing Research Group Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [RRG] Which Side to Control Ingress Link Selection?
>> I wonder if this is a problem that will still exist in future?
>> In a world with maps distributed in the way we're discussing,
>> single-ended ingress or egress selection seems to vanish as
>> the issue is how to choose an egress/ingress pair that has desirable
>> path chararacteristics.
>Doesn't the issue persist independent of the characteristics
>based on which a path gets selected? Independent of *how* a
>path gets selected, you need to decide *who* selects it (or
>who selects which part of it).
>to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with the
>word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
>archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg