as-in/as-out

Ok, if programs would be built to WARN people when they try to enter route object
which has different components of any existing ones.  I am cool with the way you
want to go. 

I figured that there is no point to spend a lot of energy on this small 
difference while we have closed on the bigger difference i.e. to allow one route 
multiple origins. :-)

						--Jessica
  > Jessica Yu <jyy at merit.edu> writes:
  > 
  > In order to close on this, let me ask the following questions:
  > 
  > 1. Concept wise, is it better to have a given route described by one and on
  > ly one
  >    route object than to have the route described by multiple object ?

It is better to have multiple objects because the route is not a single
entity if it is inserted by different ASes. The description may differ.
The components may differ although this is absolutely dangerous.
The responsibility and authority of maintenance of the objects can also
not be handled cleanly if you mash them together.

  > 2. Implementation wise, is it easier to have route be the unique key or
  >    route/origin as unique key? (query, etc)

Does not matter. The database implementation already does this with
persons where the unique key is person+nic-hdl.

  > 3. Which way is easier for tool writing:
  > 	one route object, multiple origins or
  > 	multiple route object, one origin ?

I do not think it matters much. 

Daniel

------- End of Forwarded Message




-------- Logged at  Fri Apr 29 20:52:57 MET DST 1994  ---------