Implementation of RIPE-181++

Oh well, Laurent has been beating me up because I did not include
an algorithim.

So based on the text expressed in my previous message,

If you want to generate a net list for AS1  at nap3, then:

If there is an an as-in statement for AS2 and there is an interas-in 
statement for the session between AS1 and AS2 at NAP 3 
(i.e aut-num: as1
       as-in: from as2 accept as100 OR {10.0.0.0/8}
       interas-in: from as2 L3 R3 accept as100 or {10.0.0.0/8})
then list all of the nets in interas-in expression after the keyword accept.

If there is an an as-in statement for AS2 and there is no interas-in 
statement for the session between AS1 and AS2 at NAP3
(i.e.  aut-num: as1
       as-in: from as2 accept as100 OR {10.0.0.0/8}
       interas-in: from as2 L1 R1 accept as100)
then list all of the nets in the as-in expression.

Ifthere is not an as-in statement for AS2 and there is
an interas-in statement for the session between AS1
and AS2 at NAP 3 
(i.e. interas-in: from as2 L3 R3 accept as100 or {10.0.0.0/8})
then you have an error.
            --Elise
> 
> Hmmmmmmmmmm...seems like the text is a bit fuzzy, or at least
> open to interpretation.
> 
> AS-in is the sum of the policies between any two ASes.  Yes?
> Therefore, if any session (we are not really talking links)
> between two ASs does not equal the sum (as-in), all of the 
> sessions (interas-in statements) should be explicitly defined
> to identify unabiguously the addends.
> 
> So in Laurent's scenario, there are three sessions.  The total
> policy for as1 is to accept from as2 the set of nets belonging to
> as100 and also to accept net {10/8}. The sessions between as1 and
> as2 at naps 1 and 2 are unequal to the sum (looking at each session
> independently).  Therefore, It is necessary to explicitly describe all
> sessions between as1 and as2 for clarity.
> 
> aut-num: as1
> as-in: from as2 accept as100 OR {10.0.0.0/8}
> interas-in: from as2 L1 R1 accept as100
> interas-in: from as2 L2 R2 accept as100
> interas-in: from as2 L3 R3 accept as100 or {10.0.0.0/8}
> 
> If someone registers this as:
> aut-num: as1
> as-in: from as2 accept as100 OR {10.0.0.0/8}
> interas-in: from as2 L3 R3 accept as100 or {10.0.0.0/8}
> The policy would be assumed to be equal for all sessions - even though
> that is not explicitely stated. There is no way to determine the exception
> to the global (sum ofthe policies)policy.
> 
> If someone registers this as:
> aut-num: as1
> as-in: from as2 accept as100 OR {10.0.0.0/8}
> interas-in: from as2  L1 R1 accept as100
> The policy for the other two sessions would be assumed to be equal to the
> policy stated in the as-in statement. The interas-in line that is explicitely
> stated is assumed to be the exception from the total sum of the policies.
> 
> It should be unambiguous if the maintainers explicitly define all sessions.
> If the maintainers do not, I propose that we determine the undefined sessions
> in the way previously described.
> 
> 	   --Elise
> 
> 




-------- Logged at  Tue Sep 27 10:38:17 MET 1994  ---------