IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: autosys to a PS

Tony Bates <Tony.Bates@mci.net> Tue, 14 March 1995 17:00 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04750; 14 Mar 95 12:00 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04746; 14 Mar 95 12:00 EST
Received: from interlock.ans.net by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08664; 14 Mar 95 12:00 EST
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA18016 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for iwg-out@ans.net); Tue, 14 Mar 1995 11:45:08 -0500
Message-Id: <199503141645.AA18016@interlock.ans.net>
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-2); Tue, 14 Mar 1995 11:45:08 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 14 Mar 1995 11:45:08 -0500
To: Peter Lothberg <roll@stupi.se>
Cc: yakov@watson.ibm.com, bmanning@isi.edu, bgp@ans.net
Subject: Re: autosys to a PS
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 14 Mar 1995 17:35:40 +0700. <CMM.0.90.0.795198957.roll@Junk.Stupi.SE>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Tony Bates <Tony.Bates@mci.net>
X-Phone: +1 703 715 7521
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 11:44:52 -0500
X-Orig-Sender: tony@mci.net

 Peter Lothberg <roll@Stupi.SE> writes:
  * 
  * 
  * My question is very simple, what routing protocol do we use between
  * two administrative domains?
  *
Once again we come to the same place. No one is precluding the use of
BGP for this which I guess is what you are saying. It just talks of
careful consideration in deciding when you need an AS for external
routing.

  * I can't understand why we are so hot on promoting really bad
  * engineering in the Internet?
  *
Can you elaborate on bad engineering here...if bad engineering means
people need to think about their routing policy before configuration
(sort of engineering their network for a change) then I'm for it.
 
  	--Tony.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email