[145741] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Raymond Dijkxhoorn)
Wed Oct 19 03:02:40 2011
In-Reply-To: <4E9E7236.5000403@stluke.com.ph>
From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn <raymond@prolocation.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:00:36 +0200
To: "Nathanael C. Cariaga" <nccariaga@stluke.com.ph>
Cc: NANOG Mailing List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi!
Dont mix up peering and transit connections!
That you dont see that route on a lookingglass doesnt mean much. Only Could t=
ell you they dont transit there.
Its all depending what you defini=C3=ABren with available routes.
If i peer with all ISP's in a specific area and your looking glass isnt lica=
ted there does that mean its bad? You need to know much more. If your custom=
ers are local there its even prefered.
Its never that black/white ...its depending on your needs!
Thanks,
Raymond Dijkxhoorn, Prolocation
Op 19 okt. 2011 om 08:46 heeft "Nathanael C. Cariaga" <nccariaga@stluke.com.=
ph> het volgende geschreven:
> Hi!
>=20
> We're currently evaluating web hosting providers in the APAC region and on=
e of the criteria that we are currently considering is the availability of r=
outes going to the web hosting provider.
>=20
> In this regard, I would like to ask for your idea regarding this. Is it s=
afe to conclude that the web hosting provider's available routes would would=
depend on the peers who are advertising their AS / network? (i.e if web ho=
sting provider claims that they are peering with telco a, b, c but as seen f=
rom a third party looking glass, only C is seen advertising the web hosting p=
rovider network that would mean web hosting provider is effectively utilizin=
g c as their upstream??)
>=20
> Thanks.
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> -nathan
