mailing list archives
Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...)
From: Joe Abley <jabley () isc org>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 12:44:27 -0500
On 15-Feb-2006, at 19:33, Edward B. DREGER wrote:
Want to dual-home to SBC and Cox? Great. You get IP space from
which is advertised via AS64511. Lots of leaf dual-homers do the
yet there is ONE route in the global table for the lot of you. SBC
Cox interconnect and swap packets when someone's local loop goes
Flaps within 1.0.0/18 never hit the outside world.
Personally, if I was going to multi-home, I would far prefer that my
various transit providers don't cooperate at all, and have sets of
peers and/or upstream transit providers that are as different as
possible from each others'. The last thing I need are operational
procedures which are shared between them.
If all you want is last-mile redundancy, surely you can just attach
twice to the same ISP and avoid all the routing complications
I get the feeling that there's a lot of solutions-designing going on
in this thread without the benefit of prior problem-stating.
Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Andrew Dul (Feb 14)