a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...)
jabley at isc.org
Thu Feb 16 17:44:27 UTC 2006
On 15-Feb-2006, at 19:33, Edward B. DREGER wrote:
> Want to dual-home to SBC and Cox? Great. You get IP space from
> which is advertised via AS64511. Lots of leaf dual-homers do the
> yet there is ONE route in the global table for the lot of you. SBC
> Cox interconnect and swap packets when someone's local loop goes
> Flaps within 1.0.0/18 never hit the outside world.
Personally, if I was going to multi-home, I would far prefer that my
various transit providers don't cooperate at all, and have sets of
peers and/or upstream transit providers that are as different as
possible from each others'. The last thing I need are operational
procedures which are shared between them.
If all you want is last-mile redundancy, surely you can just attach
twice to the same ISP and avoid all the routing complications
I get the feeling that there's a lot of solutions-designing going on
in this thread without the benefit of prior problem-stating.
More information about the NANOG