[107639] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: why not AS number based prefixes aggregation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Boyd, Benjamin R)
Mon Sep 8 15:49:57 2008
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:49:34 -0500
From: "Boyd, Benjamin R" <Benjamin.R.Boyd@windstream.com>
To: "Paul Francis" <francis@cs.cornell.edu>,
"Ricardo Oliveira" <rveloso@cs.ucla.edu>, <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Francis [mailto:francis@cs.cornell.edu]=20
>Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 2:31 PM
>To: Ricardo Oliveira; nanog@merit.edu
>Subject: RE: why not AS number based prefixes aggregation
>
>
>This thread begs an interesting question: what is the right=20
>amount of granularity for load balance? Folks here are saying=20
>that one-entry-per-AS is too course...an AS wants to influence=20
>load on incoming links, and so it needs multiple entries.
>
>On the other hand, it is hard to imagine that we need hundreds=20
>of entries per AS, or even dozens. So I'm curious...if we=20
>could wave a magic wand and control the exact number of=20
>entries any AS needs to advertise, what would folks consider=20
>to be roughly the right number of entries?
>
>Thanks,
>
>PF
>
Although hard to imagine, I would think that flexibility would be
desired for those willing to implement/manage it.
***************************************************************************=
************
The information contained in this message, including attachments, may conta=
in=20
privileged or confidential information that is intended to be delivered onl=
y to the=20
person identified above. If you are not the intended recipient, or the pers=
on=20
responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, Windstre=
am requests=20
that you immediately notify the sender and asks that you do not read the me=
ssage or its=20
attachments, and that you delete them without copying or sending them to an=
yone else.
