nanog mailing list archives

Re: The Cidr Report


From: "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve () telecomplete co uk>
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 19:32:49 +0000 (GMT)


On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Warren Kumari, Ph.D, CCIE# 9190 wrote:

On Feb 13, 2005, at 2:31 AM, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:

There are multiple reasons for deaggregation aside from 'dumb operator',
some are even 'valid' if you look at them from the protection standpoint.

That and the "I have 1 circuit to $good_provider and 1 circuit to
$bad_provider and the only way I can make them balance is to split my space in
half and announce more specifics out through each provider"  argument. I have
also often seen people do this without announcing the aggregate because <some
undefined bad thing> will happen, usually justified with much hand-waving.  
The people who do this can usually not be reasoned with....

this just reinforces the argument that they are lacking in technical savvy. 

i have a transit provider who i dont want to carry much traffic and i dont want
to prepend my announcements.. by looking at that providers supported customer
communities i just get them to prepend as they export to other major networks
thus moving the main volume of the traffic to the desired ingress paths

no deaggregation, no prepending..

Steve


Current thread: