[115929] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP Growth projections
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adam Rothschild)
Sun Jul 12 15:32:41 2009
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:31:10 -0400
From: Adam Rothschild <asr+nanog@latency.net>
To: Arie Vayner <arievayner@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20b13c6b0907120309k7accd61ye2d256fcb87d64b1@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2009-07-12-06:09:12, Arie Vayner <arievayner@gmail.com> wrote:
> Unless you are a major transit operator (which beats the "small ISP"
> requirement), you don't really need a full view, and can do we a
> limited view with a default route.
Disagree. Protection against big-provider depeerings, interdomain
capacity problems, etc is increasingly relevant to smaller sites
interested in getting business done. While some will outsource this
protection their (non-transit-free) provider, others enjoy maintaining
this granularity of control themselves...
-a
