[136347] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: AS numbers and multiple site best practices
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Litzinger)
Wed Feb 2 12:24:24 2011
From: Andy Litzinger <Andy.Litzinger@theplatform.com>
To: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us>, "nanog@nanog.org"
<nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 09:24:42 -0800
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C286B34F040@ex-mb-1.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> > I've had trouble finding any technical reason not to use it.
>=20
> What is important to you about having QA and Corporate use separate AS
> numbers? Does using the same AS number result in a reduction of
> separation?
For my part it's mostly a desire to make sure that changes to QA or Corp BG=
P configs could never impact BGP for our Production datacenter. So far it =
looks like it may just be a fear of the unknown on my part as I can't think=
of a good example of how one might actually affect one BGP installation by=
making changes to another BGP installation purely based on sharing an AS n=
umber (clearly you could have impact if you are advertising the same space =
from both locations).
