nanog mailing list archives
Re: Consistent routing policy?
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 15:05:08 +0200
On 16/Sep/19 14:47, Ben Logan wrote:
Thanks, Mark. So the discrepancy between what's being advertised (/21 vs /22) shouldn't cause any issues? That's the part I got a bit confused about. I don't see how it would, but I wanted to make sure.
Longest match always wins... so provided your /22's are in the global table, traffic will follow the path toward them before the /21 is preferred. So, for example, if the upstream to whom you are sending the /21 doesn't do anything about how they learn the /22 from another source, (for their network) they will also send traffic back to you via the /22 path. This may or may not be preferred by you, or them. I suppose that's the main thing to think about. Mark.
Current thread:
- Consistent routing policy? Ben Logan (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Mark Tinka (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Ben Logan (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Mark Tinka (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Ben Logan (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Arie Vayner (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Martijn Schmidt via NANOG (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Ross Tajvar (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Niels Bakker (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Ben Logan (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Mark Tinka (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Töma Gavrichenkov (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Owen DeLong (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Töma Gavrichenkov (Sep 16)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Mark Tinka (Sep 17)
- Re: Consistent routing policy? Mark Tinka (Sep 17)