nanog mailing list archives
Re: Verio Peering Question
From: Jeff Mcadams <jeffm () iglou com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 21:58:56 -0400
Also sprach Sean M. Doran
| Oh, and that scales really well.</sarcasm>
The solution to this is very simple: aggregate.
As I pointed out. AS4364 is fully aggregated (as much as we can.) Any further aggregation risks loss of connectivity for IgLou. As a network provider, we need to have robust network connectivity. An upstream that aggregates my routes more, thus endangering my network connectivity would *quickly* lose my business. Is your position, honestly, that a provider the size of IgLou doesn't *deserve* to have robust network connectivity because we're not big enough? If so, I'll be sure to avoid purchasing any transit from you. -- Jeff McAdams Email: jeffm () iglou com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
Current thread:
- Re: Verio Peering Question, (continued)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 03)
- RE: Verio Peering Question Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Marshall Eubanks (Oct 02)
- RE: Verio Peering Question Sean M. Doran (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Jeff Mcadams (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Alex Bligh (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Jeff Mcadams (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Alex Bligh (Oct 03)
- Re: Verio Peering Question E.B. Dreger (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Jeff Mcadams (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Jeff Mcadams (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question R.P. Aditya (Oct 02)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Jeff Mcadams (Oct 03)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Jeff Mcadams (Oct 03)
- sub-basement multihoming (Re: Verio Peering Question) E.B. Dreger (Oct 03)
- Re: sub-basement multihoming (Re: Verio Peering Question) kevin graham (Oct 03)
- Re: sub-basement multihoming (Re: Verio Peering Question) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 03)
- Re: Verio Peering Question Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 03)