nanog mailing list archives
Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 13:27:34 -0400
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu> wrote:
On 10/Jun/16 19:08, Christopher Morrow wrote: ​oh, so I didn't misunderstand.. that makes 'backup isp' less useful, no?​ With regard to reaching our network, not true. You would still be able to reach our network if your primary service with us failed, but not via a local peer.
​I'm clearly misunderstanding something. I suppose if it works for your customers it must be ok.​
Current thread:
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention, (continued)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) (Jun 09)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Job Snijders (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Leo Bicknell (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Joe Provo (Jun 11)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Christopher Morrow (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Christopher Morrow (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Christopher Morrow (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Hugo Slabbert (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Mark Tinka (Jun 10)
- Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention Randy Bush (Jun 10)