[3716] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Customer AS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Curtis Villamizar)
Sat Aug 17 08:30:53 1996
To: Paul Ferguson <pferguso@cisco.com>
cc: curtis@ans.net, "Chris MacFarland" <chris@computek.net>,
"Tim Crowell" <tcrowell@gte.net>, nanog@merit.edu
Reply-To: curtis@ans.net
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 17 Aug 1996 07:50:45 EDT."
<199608171151.EAA06450@lint.cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 08:17:32 -0400
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@ans.net>
In message <199608171151.EAA06450@lint.cisco.com>, Paul Ferguson writes:
> At 07:44 AM 8/17/96 -0400, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
>
> >From a purely pragmatic standpoint, what good is having a dual homed
> >prefix if Sprint and other major providers drops your prefix and you
> >can't get to places? Better to number into one of the provider's
> >aggregates. The more specific will go to everyone willing to take it
> >and anyone not willing to take the more specific can still get there.
> >
>
> Well, that was my point, in a roundabout way. :-)
>
> This is a Catch-22.
>
> - paul
The answer is clearly to number into an aggregate if you are dual
homed. Sprint will take the aggregate and at least have one path to
your prefix, very likely two if your two providers exchange your more
specific route between each other.
It is not a catch-22. Numbering into one of the provider's
aggregates is a clear win.
Curtis
