RE: some more transport MH ideas...

[Peter Tattam <peter@jazz-1.trumpet.com.au>]

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Peter Tattam wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Michel Py wrote:
> 
> > Peter,
> >  
> > What kind of "metric" or "as-path" would that solution use? 
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the question and its relevance to what I'm
> suggesting. Regular routing would take place as normally.  This is not a
> replacement for any kind of routing.  I would envisage BGP holding together the
> strong aggregated framework as we currently do, just that BGP ripples should
> end up being localized. BGP generally provides a local picture of how to get to
> a particular destination.  We are more concerned with what happens further away
> from the local picture we have. Ideally all MH paths would be possible, but in
> practice some will be better - I am not sure BGP or any protocol based on it
> will be able to provide detail on remote paths within violating our requirement
                                                 ^^^^^^
should read "without".

> to keep the DFZ small via aggregation.  Strong aggregation essentially means we
> toss away the fine grained information about remote routing.   We need to get
> that kind of information back, but not transfer it through the DFZ.
> 

--
Peter R. Tattam                            peter@trumpet.com
Managing Director,    Trumpet Software International Pty Ltd
Hobart, Australia,  Ph. +61-3-6245-0220,  Fax +61-3-62450210