Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: expectations for bgp peering?
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb () netcases net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:39:19 -0500 (EST)

Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Jan 21, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:

As for the "you're not allowed to prepend" thing, have you
experimented to see what happens if you try?  Unless they're giving
you special pricing based on the idea that they're providing you
with strictly backup transit, they shouldn't be doing the prepending
(unless you've asked them to or used communities to tell them to).

See, this is why I like NANOG.  Many eyes see things one pair does not.

Hadn't even occurred to me that they were giving you special "backup
transit only" pricing.  In that case, makes perfect sense to force
multiple prepends on their side.


Good insight, Patrick. If I might suggest a point or two, it's that
there's more than one "expectation" here, or perhaps should be:

1. Expectation on protocol/policy behavior
2. Expectation on service delivery and economics

If breaking #1 doesn't break the basic functionality, but does achieve
something under #2, it's worth clarifying. If #1 doesn't improve #2,
there's a legitimate gripe.

Means and ends aren't always locked together.




  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]