mailing list archives
Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
From: Gordon Mercer <gmercer () dn net>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 97 19:32:19 -0400
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997, Gordon Mercer wrote:
Without the ISP having total control over the
customer router, a misconfiguration of filters on
the customer side could easily cause the customer
to be a valid (and 1 hop) path in the tables from
ISP A to ISP B. Doesn't sound like a possibility I
would be willing to have hanging over my head.
Well, since my bandwidth is necessary for my
business, I think I'd be much more concerned about
becomming the valid route than my upstreams, if they
get better routing through me, it's not necessarily a
bad thing for them unless they're concerned about me
They've also got to worry about your bandwidth, which
could become a big issue depending on the size of the
two providers involved.
If they've oversold their provisioning, then yes, they
would, but I can't see how other than that they would.
Perhaps I'm missing something? In my particular case, my
upstreams are UUNet and BBN, and I've been particularly
happy with the current arrangement.
I think I see where the miscommunication lies. We were
discussing ISP's running IBGP sessions with multi-homed
customers. giving you the ability to announce routes to
another provider tagged with my AS is what makes me
Are you announcing routes to BBN as AS 701? or to UUNet
from AS 1?
Besides that, becoming a valid shortest path between two
providers that do more traffic between them than your link
to either of them can handle IS dangerous for them,
because it restricts their other customers' ability to
talk to each other.
If one of my customers had 'router bgp 7019' somehwere in
their router configs, I wouldn't sleep well at night.
Gordon Mercer -=<Dedicated>=-
703 642 2800 -=<Servers>=- gmercer () dn net
RE: Non-ISP companies multi-homing? Eric Germann (Jul 25)