[33386] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re:
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Haas)
Tue Jan 9 16:30:23 2001
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 15:18:25 -0500
From: Jeff Haas <jeffhaas@merit.edu>
To: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
Message-ID: <20010109151824.D29201@outtolunch.merit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <E14G2iC-0001KX-00@rip.psg.com>; from randy@psg.com on Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:37:32AM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:37:32AM -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
> here i quibble. i don't really like either reflectors or route servers.
> let's ignore route servers.
:-)
> so, rather than do the rr thing, which is labor intensive and a dead end in
> the long run, just jump to routers that can handle it, like small 36xx (or
> 26xx if they have the ram, i really don't know that end of your products
> well).
Many small providers aren't very good at filtering their routes in
the first place. Sloppiness in a mini-nap is expected.
One person with a little clue and a route server can make _everyones_
lives easier in such a situation.
Scaling routers is relatively easy. Scaling clue is harder. :-)
(Note that I wont disagree that in such a situation, full-mesh
peering is a very viable option.)
> randy
--
Jeffrey Haas - Merit RSng project - jeffhaas@merit.edu
