Re: Addr: Re: BGP-4 - revised I-D

[Curtis Villamizar <[e-mail]>]

In message <c=US%a=_%p=SHL%l=SHL/CANADAW/[e-mail]>om>, "NITT
MANN Michael (MSMail)" writes:
> ... just one little thing:
> 
> incorporating the AS path length into local pref calculation is reasonable 
> for boiler plate situations. But it happened to me often to chose a longer 
> path with less latency over a shorter path.
> Path length is really not a good measure. The old method I used was 
> padding,which looks ugly and gives then also skewed statistics when looking 
> at a traffic matrix.
> 
> Can we have a button then to chose how the components are weighted? I would 
> really like to get away from the AS path 'length', more to an AS wide 
> override for routes. 

Under normal circumstances, we don't use as-path length at all.  Some
providersd like it.  That's why I suggested puttring it in as an
option.  We'd enable it but set local-pref on a prefix basis (which
would make it normally a NOOP).  If somehow we had two AS listed as
primary in policies then it would make a difference.

> A gadget I would like is an rtt and packet loss measurement capability for 
> certain paths. Thus I can weigh my backbone according to meetpoint load 
> effects. Currently the only way to do this is by using Tivoli and 
> reconfiguring routers. That's ok, but if we could get this into the routing 
> engine itself this would be really nice.

This is BGP4 we are talking about.  AI capabilities are rolled into a
future version.  ;-)  Just kidding, but you get the point.

> ... most of the original article deleted ...
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mike

Regards,

Curtis