[1742] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Siegel)
Tue Jan 30 17:00:41 1996
From: Dave Siegel <dsiegel@rtd.com>
To: iljitsch@unix1.bart.nl (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 14:40:31 -0700 (MST)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199601301039.LAA00516@unix1.bart.nl> from "Iljitsch van Beijnum" at Jan 30, 96 11:39:15 am
> > > Currently I have 2 choices as
> > >far as I can make out, give them a bit of my /19, break up my
> > >nice aggregate and ensure loads of extra announcements (and that
> > >probably none of them get routed by anyone applying prefix based
> > >filtering), or give them a new /19 all of their own (you've
>
> Suppose you have a customer that needs a /22 and they want to go
> multi-homed. Suppose you give them that /22 out of your /19 or /16 you
> got from the RIPE NCC. So they announce their /22 to you and to their
> other provider. But you keep announcing your /19 or /16. So if anybody
> were to filter the /22 announcement, your customer only suffers partial
> loss of connectivity, since you are still announcing an aggregate of
> their announcemnt (your original /19 or /16).
>
> Problem fixed. Anything else? ;-)
Yes, if you go down, or their line goes down to you, their multi-homing is
worthless.
Dave
--
Dave Siegel President, RTD Systems & Networking, Inc.
(520)623-9663 Network Engineer -- Regional/National NSPs (Cisco)
dsiegel@rtd.com User Tracking & Acctg -- "Written by an ISP,
http://www.rtd.com/~dsiegel/ for an ISP."
