[50387] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: solving problems instead of beating heads on walls [was: something
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ralph Doncaster)
Sat Jul 27 13:54:38 2002
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 13:56:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ralph Doncaster <ralph@istop.com>
To: Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net>
Cc: Joe Provo <joe.provo@rcn.com>,
"nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0207271142050.6514-100000@thunder.xecu.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> >
> > And your assumption about my Ottawa-Toronto link is wrong. I have a 100M
> > point-to-point ethernet link between the cities. I have a 100M transit
> > connection to Peer1 in Toronto, and have issued a letter of intent to a
> > transit provider in Ottawa for a 100M link.
>
> Ralph, if you have a 100m link between the two cities, why don't you use
> conditional announcements to only announce your /20 though Ottawa if your
> primary transit in Toronto goes down? Then, you only need to announce your
> /20 in Toronto, no need to deaggregate, and the whole issue is solved.
>
> Then, when you have the Ottawa 100m transit link up, you can announce your
> /20 to both transit providers all the time.
>
That is roughly the intention. I also have to be able to announce the
more specifics for when the Ottawa-Toronto link goes down. You could find
in the archives my posts from a couple months back asking how to do this.
-Ralph
