nanog mailing list archives
[NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships
From: Tom Beecher via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:15:36 -0400
Because, as Elmar alluded to, it makes a mess traffic engineering wise. Like the one where I ended up having to announce both a covering and disaggregates to overcome a provider of a provider localprefing my routes on a grand tour of the continental United States when they had a peeing route to me five miles down the road. https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2024-January/224628.html
Ah yes, the 'everyone should do something different because I am inconvenienced' argument returns. On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 3:04 PM William Herrin via NANOG < nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 10:17 AM Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com> wrote:On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 8:31 AM William Herrin via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 8:10 AM Elmar K. Bins via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:Yes, and it's very often a mess traffic-engineering wise...Now, if one of the networks is playing local pref games, which they shouldn't be doing, then they may misroute packets the long way around the planet. But that's their fault for playing local pref games.Bill--can you clarify why you feel setting localpref values for peersdifferently from customersis something ISPs "shouldn't be doing?"Hi Matt, Because, as Elmar alluded to, it makes a mess traffic engineering wise. Like the one where I ended up having to announce both a covering and disaggregates to overcome a provider of a provider localprefing my routes on a grand tour of the continental United States when they had a peeing route to me five miles down the road. https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2024-January/224628.htmlIs it your assertion that as an ISP, as a provider of services to mycustomers, I should leaveit up to tie-breaking heuristics further and further down the BGPdecision tree as to whetherI can earn money by carrying traffic or not?Not all hamburger joints are in the business of selling quality beef. Is yours? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill () herrin us https://bill.herrin.us/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/MKGB2PKDIEZMXD6VT4WNWMZ5BOV7P2OF/
_______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/UO2DCPNOACFKZAD7IK4GPJKTH5OVEBUS/
Current thread:
- [NANOG] question about peering relationships Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG (Apr 07)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Mike Hammett via NANOG (Apr 07)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Jared Mauch via NANOG (Apr 07)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Christopher Hawker via NANOG (Apr 07)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Elmar K. Bins via NANOG (Apr 07)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships William Herrin via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Matthew Petach via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships William Herrin via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Tom Beecher via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Matthew Petach via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships William Herrin via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Christopher Hawker via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Kevin Burke via NANOG (Apr 10)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Tom Beecher via NANOG (Apr 10)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships William Herrin via NANOG (Apr 09)
- [NANOG] Re: question about peering relationships Mike Hammett via NANOG (Apr 07)
