nanog mailing list archives
Re: Weird BGP Issue
From: "Chris A. Icide" <chris () priori net>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 08:32:53 -0700
In many cases, one finds that people who manage thier bandwidth closely to limit the amount they buy sometimes do strange things (I'm not saying invalid or wrong things under whatever circumstances, it may be perfectly valid) to optimize the use of thier current bandwidth. For example, take a customer who has two T1 circuits from different providers. In many cases if there is a major difference between the two upstreams, (i.e. a tier one provider versus a regional ISP), BGP will tend to select one for most of the traffic. So, in many cases shortcuts are taken such as prepend all of so and so's traffic through connection A, or, perhaps in your case, prefer connection A for /16 blocks or larger, and B for smaller... I'm not commenting one way or another on the validity of this, as in many cases it's a business decision versus a technical decision. I'm just commenting that I've seen this many times. What you really need is a cut and paste of a few sho ip bgp blahs and sho ip route blahs.... -Chris At 12:02 AM 7/22/98 -0700, Jason L. Weisberger wrote:
Y's routing policy should effect both blocks in the same way however, and not be an issue - so long as they haven't decided to specifically route the block strangely.
<snip>
Current thread:
- Weird BGP Issue Jason L. Weisberger (Jul 21)
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Tatsuya Kawasaki (Jul 21)
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Jason L. Weisberger (Jul 22)
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Tatsuya Kawasaki (Jul 22)
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Jason L. Weisberger (Jul 22)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Chris A. Icide (Jul 22)
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Sean M. Doran (Jul 22)
- Re: Weird BGP Issue Tatsuya Kawasaki (Jul 21)