[145767] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Wed Oct 19 19:56:04 2011
To: "Nathanael C. Cariaga" <nccariaga@stluke.com.ph>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:21:27 +0800."
<4E9E7A77.5010109@stluke.com.ph>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:53:40 -0400
Cc: NANOG Mailing List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1319068420_2644P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:21:27 +0800, =22Nathanael C. Cariaga=22 said:
> Thanks for the prompt response. Actually our requirement is to find a =
> webhosting provider whose routes are widely advertised locally and=20
> regionally.
That's different from who the provider peers with. We (AS1312) don't
peer with much of anybody, but I *hope* our routes are pretty widely
advertised. Anybody *not* seeing routes for AS1312? (And yes, most
of the routes end up going through one or another of MATP's PoP's).
So what failure mode are you trying to protect against by finding a provi=
der
with a lot of routes? I suspect there's probably a better metric to deal=
with the actual concern...
--==_Exmh_1319068420_2644P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFOn2MEcC3lWbTT17ARAtYVAKCaGTwIzlPJkL28gFOaxKRy5Tz+LACgj3lG
vDxJff0H9YUJwu0zeCetlpw=
=ecaQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1319068420_2644P--
