Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: BGPttH. Neustar can do it, why can't we?
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:27:54 -0700

Respectfully, I disagree... I think this is a causal chain...

1.      Lack of cost-effective BGP-based service means that
2.      CPE vendors are not motivated to provide self-configuring bgp-speaking routers to behave in this manner means 
3.      SMBs seek other solutions using available CPE technology.

If cost-effective BGP-based service were available, providers would likely work with CPE vendors to get automation 
features added to products to support such services and multihomed organizations would definitely want to use those 


On Aug 6, 2012, at 13:16 , Scott Helms <khelms () ispalliance net> wrote:

Probability is much too strong IMO.  Most businesses don't even consider multi-homing and many that do use NAT 
devices with several connections rather than trying to run BGP.

#not associated nor do I recommend, just an example


This ignores the probability that cost effective BGP service availability would
strongly drive demand for AS Numbers and adoption of the technology.


Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
(678) 507-5000

  By Date           By Thread  

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