North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Route filters, IRRs, and route objects
Stephen, Your comment in 100% accurate insituation when TE obectives are localized to our AS and customer AS. Unfortunatelly in some circumstances, (very common in our case) 90% of traffic is actually just merely transited via our AS, and customer needs to have a global visibility of deaggreagated prefixes. Przemek On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 23:03, Stephen Griffin wrote: > > In the referenced message, Przemyslaw Karwasiecki said: > > > > Hello, > > > > I would like to ask you for an advice in regards to > > "proxy registering" of customer route objects in IRR. > > > > What is the best current practice in a situation, > > when your customers want to advertise to you several > > /18 or /19 but they also have a requirement to be able > > to advertise some deaggregated routes on top of aggregates. > > If your customer is merely using the deaggregates for TE, why would > they need to send the deags with anything but no-export. This > would resolve the issue of having to advertise them to your peers, > while still allowing the customer to have traffic come in whichever > link they chose. The added benefit is that no one else needs to accept > additional routes. > > <snip> >
|