On Dec 19, Nick Hilliard <[email protected]> wrote:

> The reason that IXPs are disinclined to insert the rsasn in a route
> server feed is that a route server attempts to replicate what you would
> see if you had bilateral peering sessions to all other RS clients.  If
> the IXP operator inserts the rsasn, it's materially changing the bgp
> feed and breaking the rough equivalence between bilateral and
> multilateral peering.  This is generally considered to be a bad thing,
> both by IXPs and by IXP participants.
I agree. I understand that Job's goal is to be able to identify the RSes 
in the path, and this can be done with much less operational troubles
with a well known community.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to