[139157] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Regional AS model
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Mar 28 17:44:39 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D90FA11.1080802@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:40:39 -0700
To: Dave Temkin <davet1@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 28, 2011, at 2:13 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
> On 3/27/11 2:53 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>> On Mar 25, 2011, at 3:33 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>=20
>>>> Single AS worldwide is fine with or without a backbone.
>>>>=20
>>> Only if you want to make use of ugly ugly BGP hacks on your routers, =
or, you don't care about Site A being
>>> able to hear announcements from Site B.
>> You are highly confused.
>>=20
>> Accepting default is not ugly, especially if you don't even have a =
backbone connecting your sites. And even if we could argue over =
default's aesthetic qualities (which, honestly, I don't see how we can), =
there is no rational person who would consider it a hack.
>>=20
>> You really should stop trying to correct the error you made in your =
first post. Remember the old adage about when you find yourself in a =
hole.
>>=20
>> Another thing to note is the people who actually run multiple =
discrete network nodes posting here all said it was fine to use a single =
AS. One even said the additional overhead of managing multiple ASes =
would be more trouble than it is worth, and I have to agree with that =
statement. Put another way, there is objective, empirical evidence that =
it works.
>>=20
>> In response, you have some nebulous "ugly" comment. I submit your =
argument is, at best, lacking sufficient definition to be considered =
useful.
>>=20
> And in reality, is "allowas-in" *that* horrible of a hack? If used =
properly, I'd say not. In a network where you really are split up =
regionally with no backbone there's really little downside, especially =
versus relying on default only.
>=20
> -Dave
I agree that allowas-in is not as bad as default, but, I still think =
that having one AS per routing policy makes a hell of a
lot more sense and there's really not much downside to having an ASN for =
each independent site.
Owen
