Re: 1GE L3 aggregation

[Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>]

On 23/Jun/16 08:22, Owen DeLong wrote:

> Unless the difference is HUGE, you usually don’t really care.

Agree.

We are in that scenario, and mostly don't care as well. There is enough
link capacity


> Who said anything about a ring. He is advertising a /24 to 2 upstream providers.

Which is what I said at the end of my reply to you.

The ring angle came up as part of a wider discussion earlier in this
thread, where protecting the FIB makes sense.


> Even if you’re in a ring if you’ve got two transit providers at some random point on the ring, it still probably 
> doesn’t make a meaningful difference between full feeds from each vs. ECMP, because it’s pretty unlikely that the AS 
> PATH length is affected by the ring length.

In my experience, rings are normally on-net backbones (Metro-E, e.t.c.).
The terminating devices on the core side at each end of the ring will be
your own equipment, and not another AS.

Two links to your upstream won't matter whether it's in a ring or just
plain point-to-point circuits, as there is no IGP relevance on such tails.

Mark.