The Cidr Report

Stephen J. Wilcox steve at telecomplete.co.uk
Sun Feb 13 19:32:49 UTC 2005


On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Warren Kumari, Ph.D, CCIE# 9190 wrote:

> On Feb 13, 2005, at 2:31 AM, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
> >
> > There are multiple reasons for deaggregation aside from 'dumb operator',
> > some are even 'valid' if you look at them from the protection standpoint.
> 
> That and the "I have 1 circuit to $good_provider and 1 circuit to
> $bad_provider and the only way I can make them balance is to split my space in
> half and announce more specifics out through each provider"  argument. I have
> also often seen people do this without announcing the aggregate because <some
> undefined bad thing> will happen, usually justified with much hand-waving.  
> The people who do this can usually not be reasoned with....

this just reinforces the argument that they are lacking in technical savvy. 

i have a transit provider who i dont want to carry much traffic and i dont want
to prepend my announcements.. by looking at that providers supported customer
communities i just get them to prepend as they export to other major networks
thus moving the main volume of the traffic to the desired ingress paths

no deaggregation, no prepending..

Steve




More information about the NANOG mailing list