Re: draft minutes, DB-WG meeting, RIPE-23, Jan.96, Amsterdam

[Cengiz Alaettinoglu cengiz@localhost]

Wilfried Woeber (woeber@localhost) on March 4:
>   The proposal for an extension of the inet-rtr: object was briefly
>   discussed. The original intent was to allow for a description of Mbone
>   routers. However, extending the concept could be very useful for
>   describing all sorts of peerings, like Mbone, IP-over-IP, IPnG, and the
>   like. Due to the fact that there is already a couple of tools which
>   read the peer: attributes, it might be wise to not change the peer:
>   attribute as currently defined (but to eventually make it obsolete) and
>   to invent a new attribute with the peering protocol ID as the first
>   element, the address as the second element and then the specific
>   information. To be discussed in more detail on the mailing list.

RA is also considering extending this object for more general RS
peerings. Our peers need to tell us whether we should turn on route
flap dampening, as transparency, etc.

We are thinking of using the rpsl dictionary to make this process
extensible. In other words, one would define all allowable keywords
(rpsl attributes and access methods) in the dictionary, and then refer
to them on the definition of the inet-rtr objects. Later if another
keywords is needed, one would simply modify the dictionary.

If anyone is interested in the current dictionary work, there are some
transparencies under:
	ftp.isi.edu:rps/la-ietf/dictionary.ps.gz

Comments and suggestions are welcome.

Cengiz

-- 
Cengiz Alaettinoglu           Information Sciences Institute
(310) 822-1511                University of Southern California
http://www.isi.edu/~cengiz