[166432] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fundamental questions of backbone design
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anurag Bhatia)
Thu Oct 24 06:48:36 2013
In-Reply-To: <15023.1382132808@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
From: Anurag Bhatia <me@anuragbhatia.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:17:44 +0530
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: NANOG Mailing List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi Valdis
Checkout routing table at NIXI and you will get idea what I am referring to
w.r.t. prepended routes.
http://www.nixi.in/lookingglass.php
Thanks!
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:16 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 23:33:16 +0530, Anurag Bhatia said:
>
> > localpref to customer routes then peering and finally transit. Does
> this
> > works well or you see issues with people who have 10+ prepends on some
> > peering routes calling you to not send traffic via those circuits?
>
> OK. I admit being perplexed. Under what conditions will somebody have that
> many prepends and you *still* end up routing via that path if you have
> another path available?
>
> I guess if they were silly and prepended themselves 10 times and then
> announced the result to the upstreams of *both* paths you have available...
>
--
Anurag Bhatia
anuragbhatia.com
Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> |
Twitter<https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia>
Skype: anuragbhatia.com
