RE: Confussion over multi-homing

["Dmitri Krioukov" <dima () krioukov net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
> Alex Pilosov
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 6:31 PM
> To: Dmitri Krioukov
> Cc: Alex Pilosov; nanog () merit edu; David Lott
> Subject: RE: Confussion over multi-homing
>
>
>
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Dmitri Krioukov wrote:
>
> > > 2. It only protects you from failure of a link from you to 
> upstream, not
> > > from upstream losing their connectivity, power, or flapping 
> like crazy and
> > > getting dampened. In my experience, latter happened more 
> often than first.
> > > :)
> >
> > note that "non-direct ebgp" peering on the picture can actually 
> be between
> > e-br-a and *any* router in isp-b, not necessarily isp-br-b. 
> this way your
> > real problem 2 is solved.
>
> Not really. If the 'internet defaultless core' routers drop the route to
> ISP-B, then you are still completely screwed.

oh, yeah. also, if isp-b gets suddenly evaporated, then i'm
screwed even more...   :)

anyway, i think it would be safe to conclude that the
answer to my initial question would be "no".

> -alex
--
dima.