### wrote to "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> concerning "Re: Problems with
### specific routing policies for each exchange point ":
> I was not questioning the function, only the requirement. It seems
> that if the problem exist between NAPNET and GENUITY, it might exist
> elsewhere and changing to the specific ASes would be a simple fix.
>
> Are there cases where an AS macro would be really beneficial in the
> inet-rtr.rs-(in|out) statements?Well, assuming you use as-macros as they were intended (to simply objects) ..
it shouldn't be a problem. The code is obviously broken and Jake is fixing
it. I assume that we could create another 2 macros listing every AS
individually, but then that'd be more changes that'd we'd have to make every
time we pick-up or drop an AS.
Well, the code wasn't really broken. It was doing exactly what I wanted it
to do. It was my thinking that was broken. I had assumed that no one would
ever want to loopback their expansions.
I've removed AS-NAPNET from the AS-GENUITY macro until the problem is
corrected..
The code has been fixed (many thanks to the author of rtpp, Tom Spindler,
for implimenting the changes). You can re-insert the macro.