[46845] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: genuity - any good?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy)
Fri Apr 12 17:05:21 2002
Message-ID: <3CB74BEA.F4531156@garlic.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:04:42 -0700
From: Roy <garlic@garlic.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Martin, Christian" <cmartin@gnilink.net>
Cc: "'neil@DOMINO.ORG'" <neil@DOMINO.ORG>, matthew@velvet.org,
nanog@merit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
You have hit the nail on the head. I don't argue with route filtering, just the
hoops that I had to go through with Genuity as compared to my other providers.
At the time, the fastest line available in my location was T1 and I was having
to load balance between providers and lines by advertising small pieces out
different lines.
"Martin, Christian" wrote:
> I think the argument is not about route filtering - it is the implementation
> method.
>
> Genuity uses ip extended access-lists.
>
> Everyone else uses prefix-lists.
>
> To a purist, the former is more granular, but performs poorly because it is
> a linked list implementation. The later, while less granular, performs
> faster by using a trie. It also allows insertion without list rebuilding.
> Does this matter much? I'm sure there are some that have tested convergence
> between the two technologies, so I'd welcome comments out of curiosity.
>
> They are somewhat anal with their lists as well. If you have a /19, but you
> want to deaggregate for inbound BGP TE, you will need to send them EVERY
> route you will send. That can be 64 subnets. For a /16, it is waaayyy
> worse. Then again, it allows them to know exactly how many prefixes MAY be
> announced from their customers, which I suppose has its merits.
>
> chris
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: neil@DOMINO.ORG [mailto:neil@DOMINO.ORG]
> >Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 2:08 PM
> >To: garlic@garlic.com
> >Cc: matthew@velvet.org; nanog@merit.edu
> >Subject: Re: genuity - any good?
> >
> >
> >
> >> 1) Their BGP polices are not as good as others. They force you to
> >> register each route you want to advertise rather than
> >allowing you to
> >> advertise any reasonable route for your prefixes. According
> >to one of
> >> their top people, prefix-lists were unreliable new technology. We
> >> gave up and canceled the circuit.
> >
> >Man I don't know of a provider that doesn't do this - but the
> >fact is this is a good thing.
> >
