|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> To: Martin T <m4rtntns@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 22:50:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: <CAJx5YvHb6Rj+kEZN4b1nxFkiSXe+wJpvaLO8G7t9=KRd7XW=jA@mail.gmail.com> (Martin T.'s message of "Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:45:20 +0300") Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org * Martin T.: > Florian: > >> Are the autonomous systems for the /19 and /24 connected directly? > > Yes they are. Then deaggregation really isn't necessary at all. >> (1) can be better from B's perspective because it prevents certain >> routing table optimizations (due to the lack of the covering prefix) > > What kind of routing table optimizations are possible if covering /19 > prefix is also present in global routing table? The /24 prefix could arguably be dropped and ignored for routing decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |