[4909] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Basic BGP configuration problem"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Henry Kilmer)
Tue Oct 1 15:49:51 1996
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:37:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Henry Kilmer <hank@rem.com>
To: Bradley Dunn <dunn@harborcom.net>
Cc: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.91.961001110652.480A-100000@ns2.harborcom.net>
Bradley Dunn writes:
>The reason I thought it was funny was not because they were having
>problems (all providers have problems), but because of the following:
>
>(a) In the past various Sprint people have suggested multihoming to
>different SprintLink POPs as a solution to their refusal to hear
>specifics of their aggregates from peers. Well, with four POPs having
>problems in the same day, perhaps a better term would be multi-screwed.
We are working on adjusting our multihoming policies such that
multihoming with Sprint will be a viable solution for customers.
>(b) Possible evidence for Metzger's cowboyism theory? Were these BGP
>configs tested before they were implemented?
Yes. And it wasn't the configs that were wrong. It was a BGP related
Cisco bug.
>(c) So much for the "clueless small ISPs" being the only ones unable to
>config BGP. Let's face it, routing configuration in a complex and dynamic
>internetwork is a challenging task, whether it is being performed by a
>billion dollar telco or a $100,000 startup.
Noone is immune to bugs in code.
-Hank
