[145763] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Wed Oct 19 14:55:08 2011
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:54:08 +0000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
To: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
In-Reply-To: <4E9F14FA.20902@brightok.net>
Cc: NANOG Mailing List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 01:20:42PM -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
> On 10/19/2011 12:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> >
> >On Oct 19, 2011, at 3:00 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
> >
> >>Dont mix up peering and transit connections!
> >
> >I've nearly given up on this. I've heard many a small provider say they
> >are "Peering" with level3 when they mean "we are buying transit from
> >Level3".
> >
> >Many people equate having BGP up with them to mean something else.
>
> And yet I might pay for transit from Sprint, but decide to limit routes
> to just between us (which is peering, but technically I'm paying for
> transit).
>
> Terminology has always been a blast.
>
>
> Jack
actually, its pretty clear.
peer - exchange routes with a neighbor (BGP/OSPF/ISIS/EGP/Static).
transit - your neighbor agrees to send your routes to -their- neighbors.
peering you can control, transit is controlled by a third party.
so Jack, you could pay Sprint for transit (they propogte your routes elsewhere) and
then insist on no-export for the routes you give them.. -IF- Sprint honours your
no-export, then your just peering, regardless of what you are paying for.
/bill
