On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 04:37:31AM +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
I had thought Josh's paper (or maybe not josh, whomever it was) said
something along the lines of:
1) if more than one announcement prefer 'longer term', 'older', 'more
2) if only one route take it and run!
FWIW, this sort of mechanism was discussed among the IETF RPSEC WG
task group that is working on BGP security requirements.
On the presumption that some database of stable routes and paths
is present, you could bias your preference in your routes for
more stable routes and paths.
You would also need to decide what to do about more specific routes
covered by stable routes. Do you ignore them? This is a harder