It is not clear if you mean that tools (e.g. BGP) are primitive, languages to express policy in BGP are primitive, or application of what we have (BGP + whatever language you use) is primitive. Which is it (or which subset)?
i would argue all of them; they are so tied to each other that its hard for me to distinguish. bgp does not let you do everything you want, and at times lets you do things you don't want. moreover, to my knowledge, the way most people configure it is also primitive. but our immediate goal is more modest - trying to understand whats going on and what the impact of it is. the more challenging task of fixing things will come later, when we know the current world better. -- ratul On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, David Meyer wrote:
Ratul,
understanding of routing (especially inter-domain) in the research community is really primitive. this precludes us from having realistic routing models. we recently started working on understanding prevalent inter-domain routing policies. the ultimate goal is to improve the efficiency, robustness and expressiveness of routing protocols. http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/networking/policy-inference/
It is not clear if you mean that tools (e.g. BGP) are primitive, languages to express policy in BGP are primitive, or application of what we have (BGP + whatever language you use) is primitive. Which is it (or which subset)?
Thanks,
Dave