RE: requirements draft comments.

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

>> this presumes that the architecture does not impose or negotiate outbound
>> policy at the border between a site and the more global network, and i
>> don't smell that this wg has made that decision yet.
> If the group wants to invent policy negotiation protocols, they will be
> explicitly breaking the requirement in 3.1.5 to make sure the solution
> is no more complex than today.

i guess you have not been tracking drafts in the idr wg

>> and, in order for the site to make outbound decisions, the site or its
>> components which make such decisions need the routing information on
>> which to base such decisions, even using christian's ping as a routing
>> protocol.
> Using the example I sent before; SiteB has a policy based on cost that
> if the interface to ISPd is up, default all outbound traffic there. 

for a non-trivial but useful set of folk, ISPd may not be able to take
traffic to all destinations.  there are significant sites which peer with a
few folk and buy transit from others.  sometimes they both peer and transit
another network, with separate contracts and maybe separate connections.

randy