multi-homing fixes

Craig Pierantozzi tozz at user1.bind.com
Tue Aug 28 05:51:10 UTC 2001



* Thus spake David Schwartz (davids at webmaster.com):

[snip]
> 	The quesetion is bogus, there is no such thing as a right to have a route
> in my router without paying me for it. If I choose to extend that privilege
> to people who meet certain minimum requirements because I believe the
> benefits will outweight the costs, then that's *my* right. All others can
> pay me to do it if they want me to. Your rights end at my network.
> 
> 	DS

I agree that there is no 'right' to have a route in someone else's router.  
Different providers, different policies etc. etc.  However, if I choose 
to filter on allocation boundaries but advertise prefixes to peers that 
I myself would filter based on my own policy is that considered 
hypocritical?  Bad form?  Acceptable?  Just wondering aloud.



More information about the NANOG mailing list