[40896] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: multi-homing fixes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Fri Aug 24 20:27:21 2001
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-Id: <E15aRD9-000OpY-00@rip.psg.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 17:22:03 -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> If you were in a position where you did NOT have your own previously
> allocated swamp/b/a space, you wanted to multihome to a few different
> providers in such a way that you were globally reachable no matter who
> went offline and you only needed a /24 or less, what would you do?
haven't thought about it for a while, but ... probably rethink my
requirements a bit.
my small experiences running a site or two lead me to think physical
diversity in the local loop is by far my biggest concern, like ten to
one or worse over a provider problem.
and then, almost all the provider problems i can remember my site
having were a router needing geritol or, quite rarely, a pop going
bad. i have not had a whole isp go out from under me since the bad
old days. but i have tried to stay with reliable providers.
so i might seriously consider dual homing to separate pops of a
single very reliable isp, and concentrating my energy on physical
diversity of the local loop.
if i really felt the need for multiple providers, i might do a double
nat, but with full 1:1 mapping, i.e. pure address aliasing, not space
compression. of course, some persistent connections would be lost in
the case of a link failure. but insurance against very rare cases is
ok if the expense is incurred on the rare case.
randy
