Re: the Internet Backbone

[bmanning () isi edu]

> On Mon, 8 Apr 1996, Avi Freedman wrote:
>
> > Now, many 2nd level providers that *could* operate default-free choose
> > not to.  Even if you have three or more sets of 30k+ routes each, it
> > takes balls to risk dropping packets that your customers want you to 
> > deliver just so that you can have the packet be dropped at your router
> > instead of at your (possibly backup) transit provider's router.
> >
> > Avi
>
>       Can't anyone who takes full routes from any tier 1 provider 
> operate without a default route? And isn't it a reasonable assumption 
> that if you don't have a route somewhere, odds are they don't have a 
> route to you (assuming you do your own BGP routing) and so a default 
> route is mostly pointless anyway?
>
>       What am I missing?
>
>       DS

        Because not all tier 1 providers  have all routes. In fact, most
        of them don't.  They get "full" routes by peering with many others
        or proxy aggregating and then trying to do the "right" thing.

        It really depends on who/where you want to reach.

-- 
--bill