North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: design of a real routing v. endpoint id seperation

  • From: Joe Maimon
  • Date: Thu Oct 20 16:32:40 2005

Owen DeLong wrote:

A customer with a prefix assigned from this chunk has to connect with an
 ISP who has

* a Very Large Multihoming (to handle scaling concerns) router somewhere
in its network that peers to other ISP Very Large Multihoming routers.

ISP operating a VLMrouter to offer multihoming service to their
customers would originate the entire multihoming space prefix to their
customers AND to all their peers.

These would have ALL the prefixes from the Multihoming Space.

So... Let me get this straight.  You think that significantly changing
the economic model of every ISP on the planet (or at least every large
ISP on the planet) is easier than changing the code in every core router?


ISPs who wish to connect customers who have allocations from the multihoming space must

a) announce the whole space aggregated
b) peer with other providers who host other customers

ISPs who dont wish to connect these customers should feel free not to, and that will have no bearing on the rest of those who do.

If you are referring to the affect that this will attract "unwanted" traffic, that would be considered a COB.

In essence, the previous discussion about LNP suggested that telco's must do the same thing, attract unwanted traffic, traffic they must switch right back out of their network.