Re: multi homing pressure

["Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () mci com>]

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Todd Vierling wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>
> > > > "Gartner said every location that requires mission-critical
> > > >  internet connectivity, including externally hosted
> > > >  websites, should be multi-homed"
> > >
> > > 200k routes, here we come!
> >
> > it is just good common sense though, eh?
>
> Well, not necessarily.

Sorry,

> > > > "Gartner said every location that requires mission-critical
> > > >  internet connectivity, including externally hosted
> > > >  websites, should be multi-homed"

is common sense. If you have something 'mission critical' to your business
you had better have more than one link out... It'd make great sense to
make sure that the links in question atleast didn't end up on the same
router at the far end, and while you are at it, get them to different
providers (hopefully) in different telco-hotels.

> Tier-2s should be given much more credit than they typically are in
> write-ups like this.  When a customer is single homed to a tier-2 that has
> multiple tier-1 upstreams, and uses a delegated netblock from the tier-2's
> aggregations, that means one less ASN and one or more less routes in the
> global table.

I'm not such a believer in the tier-n classifications, single homing a
critical resource is just dumb, regardless of the 'tier' you stick it in.
gartner, as gartner normally does, is just stating the obvious and making
money doing it.