[192027] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: nested prefixes in Internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy)
Mon Oct 10 13:18:40 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Roy <r.engehausen@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 10:18:33 -0700
In-Reply-To: <ccb52050-8f89-514e-1104-f5f3cfcea1f9@bogus.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I don't think I ever said that ISP-B would announce the /19. That would
only be announced by ISP-A. ISP-B would only announce the /24 that has
been delegated to it.
If the ISP-A/ISP-B link goes down then the /24 would be seen only via
ISP-C which is the desired result.
On 10/10/2016 9:16 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 10/10/16 9:04 AM, Roy wrote:
>>
>> The solution proposed allows ISP-B to use both paths at the same time,
>> needs ISP-C to minimal changes, and has low impact on the global
>> routing tables.. I have successfully used it in the past and my old
>> company is still using it today.
> Having two parties in control of a prefix announcement is a bit of a
> disaster. ISP A becomes partitioned from isp B isp B does not withdraw
> the covering aggregate and black-holes the of ISP A that lands on it's
> edge. bummer.
>
>
