[3748] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Customer AS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Mon Aug 19 15:26:41 1996
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:14:28 -0700
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@quake.net>
To: hank@rem.com, jon@branch.com
Cc: hank@sprint.net, nanog@merit.edu, randy@psg.com, smd@chops.icp.net
In my (rather extensive) practice, multihoming by itself is
usually a major source of connectivity problems.
Whoever arguing _for_ mulihoming for everyone forgets that
taking more routing information in has dangers not present
when you don't do routing yourself.
I never saw any customer who had the ability to configure a
multihomed site properly on their own; and most of the bogus
routing information comes from multihomed customer sites.
It is _much_ better to multihome to the same provider who then
can take care of messy global routing.
--vadim
PS A UPS for CPE usually fixes 95% of transmission problems.
I've seen people willing to spend money on multihoming but doing
things on commercial power.
