[49950] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: No one behind the wheel at WorldCom
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Schultz)
Sat Jul 13 17:17:44 2002
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 17:16:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Schultz <pschultz@pschultz.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <200207131943.g6DJhbb15215@lo.tech.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Stephen Stuart wrote:
> 1. Deaggregation to help spread out traffic flow. As someone who used
> to send a lot of traffic toward some big providers, it can be hard
> to balance traffic efficiently when all you get is one short prefix
> at multiple peering points. Having more-specifics, and possibly
> even MEDs that make sense, can help with decisions regarding which
> part of a /9 can be reached best via which peering point. (And
> that's peering as in BGP, not peering as in settlements.)
Legend speaks of a well known BGP community referred to as 'no export',
which causes people with no direct connections to $carrier to not
have to listen to all that extra junk while still engineering inbound
traffic w/ more specifics for people who peer directly in diverse
locations. Amazing!
> 2. Cut-outs for those pesky dot-coms; you know, the ones with the most
> compelling content on the Internet jumping up and down in your face
> with a need to multi-home their /24 to satisfy the crushing global
> demand for such essentials as "the hamster dance."
Ignoring inconsistent-as for a moment, the hamster dance multihoming
doesn't make the parent upstream need to _originate_ anything of the sort.
Paul
