Mailing List Archive

Paul,

> At 11:03 AM 1/8/97 -0600, Chris A. Icide wrote:
>
> >Would anyone be interested in a short discussion on something like
> >"Properties of an improved routing protocol"?
> >
>
> This type of discussion would be better served taking place within
> the IETF, not NANOG.

Agreed. And to be more specific, I would suggest bgp/idr mailing list.

Yakov.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Would anyone be interested in a short discussion on something like
"Properties of an improved routing protocol"?

My thought here is just a short discussion (Round Table) that might
throw proposed ideas for an improved routing protocol.

For example:

Supports policy based routing (BGP stuff)
supports server - server and server - client modes
supports link quality, delay, reliability, etc
supports QOS

etc., etc.,

Chris A. Icide
Nap.Net, L.L.C.

----------
From: Susan R. Harris[SMTP:srh@merit.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 1997 3:31 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Agenda items for February

Greetings - here are topics we've lined up so far for the Feburary NANOG:

Squid update
Introduction to Trawhoisd
Pathologic applications in the Internet
Exchange point updates (10-minute IXP presentations welcome)
Consideration of policy: issues of signaling for access and usage
End-to-end TCP packet dynamics
InterNIC update
Non-BGP multihoming for Web sites
Internet routing instability
Using the IRR to assist in aggregation

Are there other topics you'd like to hear about?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Susan R. Harris, Ph.D. Merit Network, Inc. srh@merit.edu
Phone: (313) 936-2100 Fax: (313) 747-3185
------------------------------------------------------------------------





- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

At 11:03 AM 1/8/97 -0600, Chris A. Icide wrote:

>Would anyone be interested in a short discussion on something like
>"Properties of an improved routing protocol"?
>

This type of discussion would be better served taking place within
the IETF, not NANOG.

$.02,

- paul

>My thought here is just a short discussion (Round Table) that might
>throw proposed ideas for an improved routing protocol.
>
>For example:
>
> Supports policy based routing (BGP stuff)
> supports server - server and server - client modes
> supports link quality, delay, reliability, etc
> supports QOS
>
>etc., etc.,
>
>Chris A. Icide
>Nap.Net, L.L.C.
>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

> Greetings - here are topics we've lined up so far for the Feburary NANOG:
>
> [...]
>
> Are there other topics you'd like to hear about?

Per a suggestion that found its way to me from Curtis, I'm trying to
arrange for an engineer from Digital's Networks Products Business to
come and give a short talk on GIGAswitch/FDDI head of line blocking.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

How about peering/route reflecting/MLPA issues?

| Derek Elder http://www.accessus.net V.P., CIO |
| djelder@accessus.net accessU.S., Inc. 888-637-3638 Ext. 222 |


On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Susan R. Harris wrote:

> Greetings - here are topics we've lined up so far for the Feburary NANOG:
>
> Squid update
> Introduction to Trawhoisd
> Pathologic applications in the Internet
> Exchange point updates (10-minute IXP presentations welcome)
> Consideration of policy: issues of signaling for access and usage
> End-to-end TCP packet dynamics
> InterNIC update
> Non-BGP multihoming for Web sites
> Internet routing instability
> Using the IRR to assist in aggregation
>
> Are there other topics you'd like to hear about?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Susan R. Harris, Ph.D. Merit Network, Inc. srh@merit.edu
> Phone: (313) 936-2100 Fax: (313) 747-3185
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -