<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>You can't do uRPF if you're not taking full routes.<div><br></div><div>You also have a more limited set of information for analytics if you don't have full routes.<br><br><div><span name="x"></span><br><br>-----<br>Mike Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br>Midwest-IX<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<span name="x"></span><br></div><br><hr id="zwchr"><div style="color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From: </b>"Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com><br><b>To: </b>"Dan White" <dwhite@olp.net><br><b>Cc: </b>nanog@nanog.org<br><b>Sent: </b>Wednesday, May 15, 2019 1:50:41 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: BGP prefix filter list<br><br><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:27 AM Dan White <<a href="mailto:dwhite@olp.net" target="_blank">dwhite@olp.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 05/15/19 13:58 +0000, Phil Lavin wrote:<br>
>> We're an eyeball network. We accept default routes from our transit<br>
>> providers so in theory there should be no impact on reachability.<br>
>><br>
>> I'm pretty concerned about things that I don't know due to inefficient<br>
>> routing, e.g. customers hitting a public anycast DNS server in the wrong<br>
>> location resulting in Geolocation issues.<br>
><br>
>Ah! Understood. The default route(s) was the bit I missed. Makes a lot of<br>
>sense if you can't justify buying new routers.<br>
><br>
>Have you seen issues with Anycast routing thus far? One would assume that<br>
>routing would still be fairly efficient unless you're picking up transit<br>
>from non-local providers over extended L2 links.<br>
<br>
We've had no issues so far but this was a recent change. There was no<br>
noticeable change to outbound traffic levels. <br>
</blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">+1, there is no issue with this approach. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">i have been taking “provider routes” + default for a long time, works great. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This makes sure you use each provider’s “customer cone” and SLA to the max while reducing your route load / churn. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">IMHO, you should only take full routes if your core business is providing full bgp feeds to downstrean transit customers. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
-- <br>
Dan White<br>
BTC Broadband<br>
Network Admin Lead<br>
Ph 918.366.0248 (direct) main: (918)366-8000<br>
Fax 918.366.6610 email: <a href="mailto:dwhite@mybtc.com" target="_blank">dwhite@mybtc.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.btcbroadband.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.btcbroadband.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div><br></div></div></body></html>