[36540] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John A. Tamplin)
Tue Apr 10 14:25:24 2001
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:55:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: "John A. Tamplin" <jat@liveonthenet.com>
To: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F092286039E38@condor.mhsc.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91.1010410125235.24040d-100000@cyclone.liveonthenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> AFAICT, multi-homing doesn't work unless you also have dynamic routing. Is
> this wrong?
Well, if all you care about is redundant routes (not optimizing paths) and
don't worry about asymmetric paths, you can announce just your prefixes to
each upstream and use only default routes (either received via BGP or
static interface routes) for outbound traffic.
John A. Tamplin jat@jaet.org
770/436-5387 HOME 4116 Manson Ave
770/431-9459 FAX Smyrna, GA 30082-3723
