From: bjp@sura.net Subject: Re: ANS to CIX Interconnection Cc: regional-techs@merit.edu Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 20:52:58 GMT To: mak@merit.edu
Can you tell me why you aren't keeping complete information in the CNSSs instead of the ENSSs?
Both ENSSs and CNSSs normally have complete routing information. The ENSSs will selectively announce commercial destination networks only to the participating service providers. It is possible for an ENSS to have partial routing information. However, one problem with this is that multiple regionals peer with the same ENSS at several locations. If an ENSS had partial information to administer some restriction policy, this would affect all regionals that peer with that ENSS. That might adversely affect those regionals that wish to receive the additional routes, and would certainly result in more work to maintain the policy routing database, and routing software, not to mention the management of consensus between each regional that shares an ENSS. There are ways for a regional to block this traffic, even if they continue to use default routes (e.g. create a static route for the commercial destinations to "black hole" the traffic). However it does require some effort by the regional as several people have correctly pointed out.
I can't see the problem you are solving by engaging in this activity.
The basic problem is to give remote CIX members (e.g. some regionals) access to the CIX using the ANSNET as transit. Jordan