Is multihoming hard? [was: DNS amplification]

Wed Mar 20 14:31:01 UTC 2013

On 3/20/2013 9:25 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> I don't know a single ISP that wants to throttle growth by not accepting additional customers, BGP speaking or not. (I do know several that want to throttle growth through not upgrading their links because they have a captive audience they are trying to ransom. But that is neither relevant to this discussion, not controversial - unless you are paid by one of those ISPs….)
> Comcast
> Verizon
> AT&T
> Time Warner Cable
> Cox
> CenturyLink
>
> to name a few.
>
> Not one of them will run BGP with a residential subscriber.
>
>> And please don't reply with "then why can't I run BGP on my [cable|DSL|etc.] link?" Broadband providers are not trying to throttle growth by not allowing grandma to do BGP, and swapping to LISP or anything else won't change that.
> Sure they are. If they weren't, it would be relatively straight forward to add the necessary options to DHCP for a minimal (accept default, advertise local) BGP configuration and it would be quite simple for CPE router manufacturers to incorporate those capabilities.
>
> The problem is BGP doesn't scale to that level and everyone knows it, so, we limit growth by not allowing it to be a possibility.
>

Is someone working on 8-byte ASNs yet?