[126926] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Strange practices?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jen Linkova)
Wed Jun 9 00:48:47 2010
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim95HzUoOnPLlz7SAbu8PppS5zN9_Zn7ms_FbbP@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 14:44:10 +1000
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
To: Dale Cornman <bstymied@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Dale Cornman <bstymied@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone ever heard of a multi-homed enterprise not running bgp with
> either of 2 providers, but instead, each provider statically routes a blo=
ck
> to their common customer and also each originates this block in BGP? =A0 =
One
> of the ISP's in this case owns the block and has even provided a letter o=
f
> authorization to the other, allowing them to announce it in BGP as well.
> =A0I had personally never heard of this and am curious if this is a commo=
n
> practice
I have seen it quite often. It allows an enterprise to be multihomed
w/o getting PI or PA address space so they are usually pretty happy
with it.
>as well as if this would potentially create any problems by 2
> Autonomous Systems both originating the same prefix.
AFAIR prefixes can be originated by more than one AS so there
shouldn't be any issues.
--=20
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
