Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ateng!chip From: chip@ateng.ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Rerouting considered GOOD Message-ID: <1988Oct4.120352.3322@ateng.ateng.com> Date: 4 Oct 88 16:03:51 GMT References: <8809212215.AA21035@naggum.se> <2540@sultra.UUCP> <371@ditka.UUCP> <1988Sep27.105604.5152@ateng.ateng.com> Organization: A T Engineering, Tampa, FL Lines: 24 I think we're getting somewhere now. According to lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear): >Chip calls active rerouters optimists. [...] >I say, ``Well I know there is bad data out there, and my solution will >be to discover/research(/divine;-) better methods of update and >propagation.'' And, in fact, I am working just on such a method. >I'll let you all in on it when it's finished. Finally! As many have noticed, Eliot Lear is one of the most consistent supporters of active rerouting. Yet even he admits that the _current_ method of generating and distributing map info is _not_ good enough for reliable re-routing! My conclusion: If and when Eliot comes up with a scheme that really provides a way for active rerouters to work reliably, then active rerouting may become viable option. But with the _current_ method of map propagation, active rerouting is a Bad Thing (not to mention Evil and Rude). (Eliot may not agree with my conclusion, but I find my reasoning sound. :-]) -- Chip Salzenberg or A T Engineering Me? Speak for my company? Surely you jest! Beware of programmers carrying screwdrivers.