[36321] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Faster 'Net growth rate raises fears about routers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul G. Donner)
Mon Apr 2 19:50:42 2001
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010402185503.0349aca8@lint.cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:57:44 -0600
To: Bill Woodcock <woody@zocalo.net>, Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
From: "Paul G. Donner" <pdonner@cisco.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0104021514510.25580-100000@secure.zocalo.net
>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
it also works the other way around. letting clueless networks manage
multihoming with BGP
can be a bad thing for the internet in general, especially if the upstreams
do not enforce some
*discipline* on their customers in these cases. this can be as detrimental
to the customer as
having lousy upstream service.
At 03:37 PM 4/2/2001 -0700, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> > So, please explain to me how not being multi-homed is anything
> other than a
> > bad-thing and high-risk? No, I am not including colo, because it is
> assumed
> > that you know what their arrangements are before you "buy".
> Reputable colos
> > are multi-homed, in spades.
>
>You say "responsible cab drivers must have not one, but two taxicabs, in
>order to provide service in the event of a failure. Therefore, I bought
>one from Fisher-Price, and one from Hot Wheels, and I'm astounded to find
>that neither provides me with the luxury which I expected." I think
>Patrik may have been suggesting that if you had a Checker, you might not
>need to worry quite so much about redundancy.
>
> -Bill
