On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Joe Marcus Clarke <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 1/23/13 7:19 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > > Yes, I wasn't considering it overlap - just like two routes in the RIB > > aren't > > overlapping if they're not the same prefix. > > Got you. So maybe the use case should make it clear that the DDoS > Service has already deemed a problem is seen (via some pre-programmed > copy op) and it is now overriding the pre-existing state with a higher > precedence state vs. simply inspecting traffic. > Yes, the peril of not writing down assumptions. > > In general, I think there is value to this, especially in the > notification piece. This may help management systems suspend polling > while a certain state is known not to exist. > Good to hear. Providing good notifications seems critical to making good control loops and having i2rs scale. Alia > > Joe > > -- > Joe Marcus Clarke, CCIE #5384, | | > SCJP, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, VCP ||||| ||||| > Distinguished Services Engineer ..:|||||||||::|||||||||:.. > Phone: +1 (919) 392-2867 c i s c o S y s t e m s > Email: [email protected] > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
