North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical


  • From: Dean Gaudet
  • Date: Mon Nov 18 16:57:42 1996
  • Newsgroups: hot.mailing-lists.nanog

In article <[email protected]>,
Craig Labovitz  <[email protected]> wrote:
>the larger providers. With the exception of Sprint, most providers seem to 
>have ~10% error in their BGP announcements (of course, this is from a very 
>small sampling).

Sprint install folks have this tendancy to put in static routes regardless
of whether you're peering or not.  At least that's been my experience
getting multi-line setups installed.

I'm only half-kidding when I suggest telling a sprint installer "yeah
we have our own IPs, 172.16/16".  If you do end up peering then they
seem to put a static in for the class C that contains your loopback
interface.  You can get them to change it, but the default seems to
be static-everything.

Do any providers reserve ips for use on loopbacks?  i.e. nets they
divide into /32s to point at loopbacks on the customer router.  This
would seem to be a prudent measure for many multihomed customers --
I'm loathe to use any PI addresses for loopback-peering because of
the potential for mistakes with static routes to the loopback address.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  • References:
    • IRR Brian Merritt