as-in/as-out

Daniel,

Thanks for post the writeup.  Here is my initial comment.  


>route:       [mandatory]  [single]
>origin:      [mandatory]  [single]
>component:   [optional]   [multiple]
>comm-list:   [optional]   [single]     [guarded]
>descr:       [mandatory]  [multiple]
>remarks:     [optional]   [multiple]
>notify:      [optional]   [multiple]
>maintainer:  [optional]   [single]
>changed:     [mandatory]  [multiple]
>source:      [mandatory]  [single]

I assume 'origin' has the same concept as 'creator' which we defined at our
San Diego meeting.  Just try to be sure.

Does your definition above mean that one route can only have one 'origin'?    

If yes, then how do you plan to handle the proxy aggregate situation where it
is possible that different ASs do the proxy aggregate for the same AS and
therefore one route will have two origins?  Also, how do you plan to handle
the cases which ASs further aggregate the routes they hear from different ASs?
i.e. aggregate beyond AS boundary.  E.g. AS1 aggregate routes from AS2 and AS3 to 
a route called route-a, and AS4 does the same thing.  Now route-a has two origins 
AS1 and AS4 (see the diagram below).

			AS1
		      /     \
		    AS2     AS3
	              \      /
		        AS4		


Proxy aggregate like mentioned in your write up is not been done yet.  But it
will be very soon.  We have customers line up for us to do proxy aggr for them.
The software is almost ready so it will be done really SOON.  

Proxy aggregate for multi-homed AS will be done when people get desperte to
reduce the routing table size, so does aggregation beyond AS boundary.  So
it is really desirable for routing registry to be designed to anticipate this
will happen and be able to deal with it.  If you allow one route has more than
one orgin, that will do it.  What is the concern of doing that? 

Thanks!

							--Jessica



-------- Logged at  Wed Apr 27 21:31:16 MET DST 1994  ---------