[22810] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: aads renumbering rumor and implications
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Danny McPherson)
Mon Jan 25 11:51:50 1999
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Danny McPherson <danny@qwest.net>
Reply-To: danny@qwest.net
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 09:30:39 -0700
> do i want to find out if ciscos and junipers can handle a hundred+ secondary
> addresses?
i'd guess neither vendor would have problems with this. however, several
routing protocols have problems with secondary addresses. while BGP does not,
folks are likely doing other "interesting" things at exchanges that this would
effect. not to mention administrative overhead with adding new secondary
address and such when adding additional peers.
> and do we want to maintain such configurations??
not particularly. i'd think for the price of local loop, co-location and port
fees, they'd be able to pick up the tab for the subnet...
yet another reason to avoid public exchanges altogether, i suppose.
-danny
