This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/routing-wg@ripe.net/
[routing-wg]Idea about AS-usage on IXPs
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]Idea about AS-usage on IXPs
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]Weekly Routing Table Report
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
Tue Dec 19 20:12:47 CET 2006
Kurt, which problem do you try to solve? :-) In principle an IXP is a Layer 2 fabric with no IP stuff involved. If there is Layer 3 stuff (route servers, statistics, web,...) then the *IP* stuff would usually have an IXP-defined routing policy. Why should we try to force indepentend organisations to use the same routing policy all over the places? Cheers, servus, Wifried. Kurt Kayser wrote: > Hi, > > Since all public IXPs are using unique IP-Allocations for the exchange > fabric, > I thought about the possibility to hook them all up under the same > AS-number. > > Each prefix/IXP is visible the same as before and exchange networks > could be easily > identified by the AS-number and specially treated (filtered/preferred). > > Feedback? > > Thanks, Kurt > >
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]Idea about AS-usage on IXPs
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]Weekly Routing Table Report
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]