here's as far we have got.

Laurent,

Let's take the postulate : 


  - A route is something that is present in the routing table of
    a router, belonging to an AS define in the routing registery, 

    somewhere in the Internet.

and let's try to demonstrate the following proposition :

  - You never need to define a component on a route object if you
    have the hole attribute.
    (considering that we are not dealing with the "host" definition
     used for prtraceroute or any other tools, this point will
     be looked at after).

1) In case of homogenous aggregation this is trivial.

You are neither loosing any information in aggregating nor beeing 

able to add information that is the principle of the
homogenous aggregation as define in page 13.

2) In case of heterogenous aggregation

In the document (page 14) it is stated that teh community SPECIAL may
not be relevant to routing, from my point of view that is nonsense. We
are now dealing with a routing registery not with a global registery,
so a community defined in a routing registrery must be relevant to
routing !!!! And if this community is relevant to routing the route
entry with community SPECIAL must be kept in the registery.

So for the example given :

route:  193.0.8.0/24
descr:  Enterprise 2
origin: AS2

and

route:     193.0.9.0/24
descr:     Enterprise 2
origin:    AS2
comm-list: SPECIAL

the entries remaining in the routing registery will be in case of
aggregation :

route:  193.0.0.0/20
origin: AS2
hole:   193.0.0.0/24
hole:   193.0.2.0/23
hole:   193.0.4.0/22
hole:   193.0.10.0/23
hole:   193.0.12.0/22

and 


route:     193.0.9.0/24
descr:     Enterprise 2
origin:    AS2
comm-list: SPECIAL

3) Proxy aggregation

Let's take the example of AS2 making proxy aggregation for AS1. AS1
has to be registred in the routing registery in order to be able to
define its routing policy with AS2. AS1 is not able to aggregate and
ask AS2 to do it for it. AS1 has still to declare all the routes that
have to be announced in order to allow AS2 to build access-list or
whatever. So the entries for AS1 in the routing registery will be :

route:   193.0.8.0/24
origin:  AS1

route:   193.0.9.0/24
origin:  AS1

Now in order to aggregate AS2 will generate the following entry:

route:   193.0.8.0/23
origin:  AS2
descr:   Proxy aggragate for AS1

but the entries of AS1 must not be deleted because they are used
between AS1 and AS2. So no component is needded. CQFD.

Conclusion :

Components are never needed with the following condition that seems
to be evident , a community defined in the routing registery is 

relevant for routing.

(Just a point of detail, in the tool that will show the content
of an aggregat hole will take precedence on route. I mean by that
that if an aggregat is defined with hole, even if a route equivalent
to the hole is present in the registery the hole will be shown)

So now let's take the old attribute ias-int that is used for
differents tools. Putting it as a component on a route is not the
best solution. In fact it may happend that an interconnect net
have not any connectivity outside an AS. An example is easy to
find from AS789 to go to AS2156 you cross AS1717, all the
interconnections nets on the road are local to AS1717 so 

they are not registred in the routing registry so all the
tools are "broken".....

So to conclude my proposals are the following :

1) Define the community in the routing registry as related
   to routing.
2) Define the route object as I propose yesterday
3) Define a new object called dmzhost (or something like that)
   with the following definition :

dmzhost:     [mandatory]      [single]
origin:      [mandatory]      [single]
gardian:     [mandatory]      [single]
   .
   .
   .

This object will be a guarded object and will be used to
define interfaces IP number as the old ias-int attribute
of the inetnum object.

dmzhost:
         IP number of an interface of a router in a DMZ

         Format:
            Ip number in "prefix form"

         Example:
            dmzhost:  192.10.10.10/32

origin:
        The autonomous number to which belongs the router
        with this IP address.

        Format:
           <aut-num>
. 

. 

. 

. 


Comments ..........

Gilles



-------- Logged at  Wed May 25 09:48:54 MET DST 1994  ---------