Re: Networks ignoring prepends?

[William Herrin <bill () herrin us>]

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 4:16 PM Alex Le Heux <alexlh () funk org> wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 2024, at 00:43, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
> > Every packet has two customers: the one sending it and the one
> > receiving it. 3356 is providing a service to its customers. ALL of its
> > customers. Not just 47787. Sending the packet an extra 5,000 miles
> > harms every one of 3356's customers -except for- 47787.
> >
> > In this case, I am the customer on both ends. 3356's choice to route
> > my packet via 47787 serves me poorly.
>
> Packets don't have customers, ISPs do. And in this case you're not a customer of the ISP making the routing decision

Incorrect. I am a customer of 3356. A residential customer, not a BGP
customer. I'm paying them to route my packets too, and they're routing
them poorly.

Also incorrect: every packet in your network is linked to either one
or two customers. Never more. Never less. Routing my packet via 47787
in this case serves neither of us: my Internet access is severely
degraded and 47787 is charged money for a packet they need not have
handled.

Charging your customers to make their service worse doesn't seem like
a good business model to me, but maybe that's why I'm not a CEO.


> Fact is that all prepending does it provide a vague hint to other
> networks about what you would like them to do.

Until they tamper with it using localpref, BGP's default behavior with
prepends does exactly the right thing, at least in my situation.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William Herrin
bill () herrin us
https://bill.herrin.us/