nanog mailing list archives

Re: BGP prefix filter list


From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 11:50:41 -0700

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:27 AM Dan White <dwhite () olp net> wrote:

On 05/15/19 13:58 +0000, Phil Lavin wrote:
We're an eyeball network. We accept default routes from our transit
providers so in theory there should be no impact on reachability.

I'm pretty concerned about things that I don't know due to inefficient
routing, e.g. customers hitting a public anycast DNS server in the wrong
location resulting in Geolocation issues.

Ah! Understood. The default route(s) was the bit I missed. Makes a lot of
sense if you can't justify buying new routers.

Have you seen issues with Anycast routing thus far? One would assume that
routing would still be fairly efficient unless you're picking up transit
from non-local providers over extended L2 links.

We've had no issues so far but this was a recent change. There was no
noticeable change to outbound traffic levels.


+1, there is no issue with this approach.

i have been taking “provider routes” + default for a long time, works
great.

This makes sure you use each provider’s “customer cone” and SLA to the max
while reducing your route load / churn.

IMHO, you should only take full routes if your core business is providing
full bgp feeds to downstrean transit customers.


--
Dan White
BTC Broadband
Network Admin Lead
Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
Fax 918.366.6610            email: dwhite () mybtc com
http://www.btcbroadband.com


Current thread: