[110882] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: expectations for bgp peering?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Howard C. Berkowitz)
Wed Jan 21 11:39:23 2009
In-Reply-To: <5CC5E40C-4889-4E2F-834A-01862A0F62C6@ianai.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:39:19 -0500 (EST)
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@netcases.net>
To: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
>
>> As for the "you're not allowed to prepend" thing, have you
>> experimented to see what happens if you try? Unless they're giving
>> you special pricing based on the idea that they're providing you
>> with strictly backup transit, they shouldn't be doing the prepending
>> (unless you've asked them to or used communities to tell them to).
>
> See, this is why I like NANOG. Many eyes see things one pair does not.
>
> Hadn't even occurred to me that they were giving you special "backup
> transit only" pricing. In that case, makes perfect sense to force
> multiple prepends on their side.
>
Good insight, Patrick. If I might suggest a point or two, it's that
there's more than one "expectation" here, or perhaps should be:
1. Expectation on protocol/policy behavior
2. Expectation on service delivery and economics
If breaking #1 doesn't break the basic functionality, but does achieve
something under #2, it's worth clarifying. If #1 doesn't improve #2,
there's a legitimate gripe.
Means and ends aren't always locked together.
>
