|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>, Aaron Gould <aaron1@gvtc.com> From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 08:28:43 -0800 In-Reply-To: <91BEAAEB-9913-4715-96D5-5D5613F0AC2D@puck.nether.net> Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --SbnppnU4kpd3MxeeRaDxrLvsiUgprHaDi From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>, Aaron Gould <aaron1@gvtc.com> Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> Message-ID: <c6847bae-c7ca-127a-d297-402b70c59dab@bogus.com> Subject: Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent References: <001801d28f7e$d063ac10$712b0430$@gvtc.com> <139584545.18898.1488463289724.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck> <002201d2936c$61011e60$23035b20$@gvtc.com> <006001d2936e$cb058d30$6110a790$@gvtc.com> <CAPkb-7CfLgZouCRrQGtcfad9mQdFqn05B5La__-PoRkx3CtXdw@mail.gmail.com> <000001d29383$da01b6f0$8e0524d0$@gvtc.com> <20170302185820.e3cqwcnvmzcgek2o@mew.swordarmor.fr> <CAO+x49Lejq48+ES9DhqmjjGRoA42313Vzhsj7fmfBP_rP3ShhQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7AgDB6k-c+j5Nctimk9y2w48i-_5JoXzs3Aa73HgvoXGA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7DN0VOZ4C3BaozEgeBKR2SZcRxW+Ob0yET3bZdH298Aew@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7DUaHUGqG=CPw2JyDAstt1eNPGSYZq0PK9dOnQ3wC4PYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAO+x49+suRzVk9G4m7D11ii-qMTgEp9Wkds8zshus0SebiwXrg@mail.gmail.com> <000901d2938e$7be4d880$73ae8980$@gvtc.com> <91BEAAEB-9913-4715-96D5-5D5613F0AC2D@puck.nether.net> In-Reply-To: <91BEAAEB-9913-4715-96D5-5D5613F0AC2D@puck.nether.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/2/17 3:42 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: > Yes. Most providers can send you just their customer routes. If they se= nd you full routes you want to discriminate customer vs peer routes. This= is typically done with communities and is worthwhile as most people have= capacity on customer links but via peer it may not always be the case.=20 > > As is usual YMMV It's relatively straight-forward to take a full table feed and accept into your fib only the routes you want from that table. I presented on variant of that based on my need for partial fib peering switches; but other reasons for doing so exist, e.g. defailt + te-overrides, prefix filters weighted by per prefix utilization and so on= =2E In general I'd get the full table and the default if you intend to take the default but need recourse to over-rides (for example if your fib won't hold full table is an element of the design). if the Rib won't hold three full tables well that's a different sort of problem, and this may be the wrong router platform. joel > Jared Mauch > >> On Mar 2, 2017, at 2:52 PM, Aaron Gould <aaron1@gvtc.com> wrote: >> >> Yes, thanks, I am going to do that. But, is there a middle ground bet= ween being default only and full routes ? Like is it advantageous for me= to ask for partial routes (like their routes and direct peers and defaul= t route) ? This way I don't have millions of routes but I guess only a f= ew hundred thousand or less? Let me know please. >> >> -Aaron > --SbnppnU4kpd3MxeeRaDxrLvsiUgprHaDi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iEYEARECAAYFAli+37sACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrK4WQCdFyLDTktm6C0+kI2BBMyQTtfu VegAn3mJT43Iod3BWteYlnP8hfHP0I0H =uA/2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SbnppnU4kpd3MxeeRaDxrLvsiUgprHaDi--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |