Sean Doran wrote:
...
>   Are you of the belief that
> as a matter of policy, everyone but "top level" providers will have
> addresses from a "top level" provider, with no exceptions?
> 
> Do you also beleive that for inter-TLA routing information-exchange 
> purposes, with respect to the destination address, ONLY the 13 (to
> 21) TLA (+ RES) bits you mention should ever be considered by a
> router in the core of the global network, except where two
> directly-peering TLAs agree to exchange some NLA information?

This is the plan. We start out with no holes in BGP and we try to
keep it that way.

   Brian

Reply via email to