North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Why doesn't BGP...
Well, sure, but why should I _have_ to? I thought we, in part, pay the big bucks for routers that are supposed to figure some of this stuff out on their own without having to "band-aid" things with AS path manipulations, etc. On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, Deepak Jain wrote: > > Can't you adjust your metrics/weights to prefer the low speed links less? > > -Deepak. > > On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, Ed Morin wrote: > > > With all the recent talk about BGP, etc., I thought I'd see if anybody > > knows the reasoning behind a particular short-coming of BGP that I've > > noticed and found particularly bothersome... > > > > We peer, using BGP, with several "backbone" provider networks for transit > > purposes. Some of these links are "faster" than others (e.g. T-3 vs. > > multiple T-1 and single T-1) for various reasons. If our router sees > > a route to a particular destination via a "high-speed" link and a "low- > > speed" link that has the _same_ number of AS "hops", it picks the link > > with the "lowest" IP address! (At least that's what I'm told and what > > I observe...) > > > > Why doesn't BGP pick the link with the highest bandwidth, or, better > > yet, pick the link with the highest bandwidth AND least congestion to > > label as the "best" available route? The needed information is avail- > > able in the router (and if it was somebody doing BGP from a host that > > was separate from the box with the interfaces, well, then too bad I > > guess) and can't be _that_ hard to incorporate can it? > > > > I'll get off my soapbox now... > > > > Ed > > > > > Ed Morin Northwest Nexus Inc. (206) 455-3505 (voice) Professional Internet Services [email protected] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -