as-in/as-out

>What if there are different components/hols making up the two routes.

	It is dangrous for two ASs make the same proxy aggregate route
	with different components.  That is something should be avoided
	and perhaps outlawed.

	By using one route object for multiple origins, it is able to
	ENFORCE different ASs make consistent agggregate when they proxy
	for other ASs.   That is a good argument for the design. 

	Who controls? The first AS regists win.  Of course, they
	have to cordinate when the second AS regist the same
	route object.  If they want to update that object, they
	have to coordinate and they need to coordinate with each
	other if the make the proxy aggr for the a particular AS.

						--Jessica 

Date:    Thu, 28 Apr 1994 18:05:24 +0200
To:      Jessica Yu <jyy at merit.edu>
cc:      epg at merit.edu, rr-impl at ripe.net, jimi at cernvax.cern.ch

From:    Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net>
Subject: Re: as-in/as-out 

Return-Path: dfk at ripe.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 28 Apr 1994 11:52:25 EDT.
         <199404281552.LAA29231 at merit.edu> 
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Sender:  Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net


  > Jessica Yu <jyy at merit.edu> writes:
  > 
  >     Why not allow one route object with multiple origins to save
  >     some overhead?  Also, it will be good if you make a clear
  >     description on this part in your document. 

Multiple problems:

Who maintains that route object? 

What if there are different components/hols making up the two routes.





-------- Logged at  Thu Apr 28 21:46:22 MET DST 1994  ---------