> The third is a route server. The route servers allow > exchange participant to outsource the routing task (but not the > forwarding of packets) to a specialized host within the exchange.
I've also heard some semantic confusion between route-servers and route reflectors. In conversation, I usually assume that distinction to be between functionally equivalent boxes operating in the plenum between a number of administrative domains (a route-server) or as glue between regions or ASes within one administrative domain (a route reflector). I don't know how common that understanding would be, though. Anyone have any better thoughts on the difference between a route-server and a route reflector?
I've attempted to write that up in a whitepaper I'm doing for several IXP projects in Africa (see http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/ixp/ - just remember it is a draft and focused for non-US/Europe IXPs). One key difference between a Router Server and Route Reflector is that a Router Server allows for bi-lateral agreements. A Router Reflector forces Multi-lateral on the whole IXP (see the history with HKIX. Barry