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