[36794] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The ultimate routing loop?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Fri Apr 20 08:11:43 2001
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Message-Id: <200104201224.MAA07516@vacation.karoshi.com>
To: sean@donelan.com (Sean Donelan)
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:24:43 +0000 (UCT)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20010420062826.18663.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net> from "Sean Donelan" at Apr 19, 2001 11:28:26 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
you could refer to the discussions held at the joint ISOC/IETF mtg
in Montreal in 1996 about injecting host routes for critical
infrastructure support services.
>
>
> I'm in washington this week, and as usual, some of the strangest
> ideas come up.
>
> Suppose I wanted the best chance for my packet to get through, no
> matter what tier 1, 2, 3 network was still operating between points
> A and B. I designate a "special" IP address block, and arrange for
> the top 10 providers to accept announcements for the block both
> directly, and transit through any of the other 10 providers. This
> would allow transit via a third-party network to restore connectivity
> across a partioned AS. For this network block, other than BGP loop
> detection, it would bypass the normal peer/transit/peer filters.
>
> If a AS was partioned, you might see a route cross two or three
> primary backbones, and even the same backbone twice. But if the
> packet went through, its worth it.
>
> The questions is: Are more available paths really better? Or does
> it just create more instability?
>
>
>
>
