[155380] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGPttH. Neustar can do it, why can't we?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Herrin)
Mon Aug 6 19:16:16 2012
In-Reply-To: <12289110-9310-474C-8457-0E2C25562565@delong.com>
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:15:26 -1000
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> That's simply not true at all...
>
> Let's look at what it takes to configure BGP as I suggested...
>
> 1. The ASN number of the two providers
> 2. The ASN to be used for the local side
> 3. The IP Address to use on the local end of each connection
> 4. The IP Address to peer with on each connection
> 5. The prefix(es) to be advertised.
Add to that:
6. Primary A, Primary B, Balanced (routing priority via AS path prepends)
7. Optional password for each session (some ISPs require one)
Or take another tack: have the SOHO router accept a URL for each BGP
connection and have the provider build the config. Then all you enter
is your provider-assigned interface address, a DNS server address and
a URL.
Your point is well taken. A leaf node BGP configuration could be
simplified to the point where it fits on a SOHO router config page and
does not require an expert to configure.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
