interconnection richness effects Re: Was [Re: Sprint peering policy]

Sat Jun 29 20:15:59 UTC 2002

That makes sense ... many full routing tables is fare worse than
many partial routing tables. If my last resort was buying from a
Tier 1 after peering out most of my traffic I would prefer "paid
peering" or "partial transit". ... and one can always not listen to
routes that have multiple non optimized paths via transit
connections.

If you have 10 ways to an ASN and 3 or four stable and clean diverse
routes exist ... why chew up memory and CPU listening to the poor
routes?

--On Saturday, 29 June 2002 16:01 -0400 Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 07:42:03PM -0000, Joseph T. Klein wrote:
>>
>> Flat designs tend to ring like a bell when instability is introduced.
>> I think we held the world record for flapping at NAP.NET in 95-96.
>> That was a flat design executed during a time when the Cisco architecture
>> and software could not keep up with the growth and churn rate. The
>> inclusion of algorithms that enhanced oscillation ringing (and since has
>> been fixed in IOS) did not help.
>
> Have you ever seen an InterNAP route flap? Its good for around two minutes
> or 120 traceroutes of pure humor, with a different loop across a different
> backbone in a different city with every invokation.
>
> Extensive peering relationships don't generally cause a breakdown of BGP,
> which is probably the reason that we have settled into using that system.
> Extensive transit relationships on the other hand, like those used by the
> "optimized routing" crowd to try and take advantage of all the "richness
> of paths" out there which aren't being used efficiently, break BGP very
> very quickly (in my experience at any rate).
>
> --
> Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
> PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177  (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA  B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
>

--
Joseph T. Klein                                         jtk at titania.net

    "Why do you continue to use that old Usenet style signature?"
                                                                -- anon
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 229 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20020629/e2dc8b8a/attachment.sig>