[118848] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Upstream BGP community support
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jim deleskie)
Sat Oct 31 20:31:12 2009
In-Reply-To: <m21vkjyttt.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:30:38 -0300
From: jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Here is the problem as I see it. Sure some % fo the people using BGP
are bright nuff to use some upstreams communities, but sadly many are
not. So this ends up breaking one or more networks, who in turn twist
more dials causing other changes.. rinse, wash and repeat. But like
Randy said who am I to stop anyone from playing... just means those of
us with clue will be able to continue to earn a pay check for a very
long time still :)
-jim
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> while i can understand folk's wanting to signal upstream using
> communities, and i know it's all the rage. =A0one issue needs to be
> raised.
>
> bgp is a brilliant information hiding protocol. =A0policy is horribly
> opaque. =A0complexity abounds. =A0and it has unfun consequences, e.g. see
> tim on wedgies etc.
>
> and this just adds to the complexity and opacity.
>
> so i ain't sayin' don't do it. =A0after all, who would deny you the
> ability to show off your bgp macho?
>
> just try to minimize its use to only when you *really* need it.
>
> randy
>
>
