Re: comments on draft-py-multi6-gapi-00.txt

[Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


>>>>> "Pekka" == Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> writes:
    Pekka> I'd like to expand on one particular point:

    Pekka> On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
    >> If we could pass a law that every local government in the world had to
    >> set up a monopoly IXP for its area, we might be able to obtain enough
    >> congruence between geography and topology. But I don't expect that any
    >> time soon.

    Pekka> .. IXP does not have to have a monopoly AFAICS, more specifics can
    Pekka> be advertised in every IXP.

    Pekka> What is more troublesome is that the IXP business model must be so
    Pekka> that it has upstream connectivity, and advertises the aggregate to
    Pekka> the Internet.  And that the IXP has sufficient redundancy so
    Pekka> people would not have to work around its back..

  Yes. 
  The key is that the amount of bandwidth can be limited if the traffic has
to move to a PA address.

  The ideal way is that every ISP that peers at such an IXP advertises this
aggregate. 

  The potential to abuse such an advertisement must be dealt with. Maybe
by making the MTU very low... 90 bytes maybe, and rate limiting by 
destination address. 

]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQCVAwUBPkRZgYqHRg3pndX9AQHOxQP+K77Hf5EfqKwncCahwlWVnq1abHmp8oim
7Ctytj0fMU2VCWl4kgDf2GVyqlxH6tTtHDBH6fyn5EWHTbp0coJjOdXi2eaWYMvA
baifbSnb7J4O14c6I+Pdz4sIkcJVDZ3ycCXsDcV1X32E1oHjJA1/zoyeF+QgJWll
lcH34nORdVw=
=Eu4o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----