AS migration

Justin M. Streiner streiner at
Tue Jan 22 21:11:40 UTC 2002

On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Miguel de Leon Dimayuga wrote:

> Collapsing AS'es has its technical benefits, ultimately
> resulting in financial benefits.  For starters, you'll
> be able to manage your transit traffic better (and thus 
> grow your pipes in a more sane manner).

I'm also looking at it from the perspective of making peering with various
providers or in various exchanges a more compelling business driver, as
opposed to putting all of the $$ into transit.

> You'll also be able to control your inter-AS traffic much 
> better (especially if you plan to eventually collapse and 
> use common servers/services across AS'es).  An example of
> this is collapsing your news server farms or mail server
> farms.

Most of the service/server consolidation has already been done.

> One approach we took before merging AS'es is to make 
> sure you have a common local pref and community 
> infrastructure among the AS'es you want to merge.
> attempting to go confeds with mismatching local pref
> and community based policies might be a headache.

I designed both for all of the other ASes so they're all similar in

> On the IGP front, make sure that your private networks
> are distinct among AS'es.  Once you merge OSPF entities,
> you could have duplicate 192.168.x.x spaces.

My big concern is controlling IGP growth as a whole.  Each of the ASes
is running their own independent OSPF implementation.  Dealing with all of
those disjoint backbone areas and rolling them into one AS while
minimizing/eliminating service disruptions for my customers has been a
source of constant brow-beating.

> That's a start.  my 0.02 cents worth.

Much appreciated.


More information about the NANOG mailing list