a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...)

Edward B. DREGER eddy+public+spam at noc.everquick.net
Wed Feb 15 20:22:40 UTC 2006

CA> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:04:24 -0600
CA> From: Chris Adams

CA> There's a difference: computers (routers) handle the O(N^2) routing
CA> problem, while people would have to handle the O(N^2) cooperative AS
CA> problem.

0.1 ^ 2 < 5000

One must also consider the scalar coefficient.

CA> We are a relatively small ISP with just a handful of multihoming

Sounds like the O(N^2) coefficient is small.

CA> customers.  However, no two of them have the same other provider.  What
CA> is gained by us setting up relationships with a bunch of other providers
CA> and getting special ASes assigned?  What if one of those customers gets

Each one needs an ASN, anyhow.

CA> a connection to a third upstream, or if they change their upstream?

Third upstream?  They're ready for their own portable ASN.

Change upstream?  In general, change ASN.  Slight pain, but not too bad 
for the average small leaf.  If they're the only entity that uses both 
you and Joe-Bob's Inet, the coop ASN could still be used when they drop 
Joe-Bob and replace it with SomeOtherNet.

CA> Right now, it doesn't affect us (we don't have to do anything), but in
CA> your setup, it would require us to get yet another AS.

It does affect you now.  You add a BGP session to their portable ASN.  
Instead, you'd add a new ASN when the other upstream was one with whom 
you were not already cooperating.

CA> Only one of our multihoming customers has a connection to someone we
CA> already have a connection with, so there's no path between our network
CA> and the rest.

Again, this is the big rub. :-(  Ideally, everyone would peer via an 
exchange point, or perhaps a local frame or ATM cloud.  I'm more than a 
little hesitant to suggest shared upstreams leaking long prefixes 
between the lot of you, or anything else that even smells like a VPN.

However, for every entity that multihomes between you and SomeOtherNet, 
there are probably a hundred with the SBC/Cox combination.

Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/
A division of Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/
Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national
Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita
DO NOT send mail to the following addresses:
davidc at brics.com -*- jfconmaapaq at intc.net -*- sam at everquick.net
Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked.
Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.

More information about the NANOG mailing list