Re: [mif] Server selection document is "band-aid" not solution

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 2011-11-18 15:17, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2011, at 9:18 AM, "Brian E Carpenter" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> However these (and any other) host mechanisms need an initial set of address
>> pairs to try out and, in many cases, an order of preference in which to
>> try them. In some cases (but not all) DNS may be source of a set of
>> destination addresses, but it's only the routing system that can provide
>> a priori information about which address *pairs* are worth trying.
> 
> Can you provide an example of a case where the routing system has the capacity to do this in a MIF setting where you have two interfaces connected to separate administrative domains?   I agree at least in principle that you may be able to come up with some special case where you could decide on the basis of some such information which pair to try first.   However, I am pretty sure that a general solution will not be able to rely on whatever information source you rely on in whatever special case you cite.
> 

Today? Probably not. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be a
goal. Things like knowing which egresses are subject to which
ingress filters, for example, could be known to the border routers.

   Brian