[44625] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fwd: Free Online Seminar from Cisco and BellSouth
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Wed Dec 5 19:57:25 2001
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:56:51 -0500
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20011205195651.A43118@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@merit.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20011206003821.58327.qmail@web11608.mail.yahoo.com>; from jimpop@yahoo.com on Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 04:38:21PM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 04:38:21PM -0800, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> Does anyone else see this as a bad thing? I'm all for Cisco moving hardware,
> but is it really wise to BGP enable everybody w/ a T1?
Note that BGP enabling a customer != having them inject a prefix
into the global table.
Having a customer with two links, a BGP sent default, and a BGP
received prefix for their LAN is not a bad solution.
--
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
