|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: PI space and colocation
On Wednesday, January 18, 2006 12:10 PM, Pat wrote: > On Jan 18, 2006, at 3:03 PM, Jon Lewis wrote: > > >>> Is it a reasonable alternative to establish a BGP connection with > >>> the provider over ethernet? > >> > >> It is technical feasible, but I don't think 'reasonable'. > Stub ASes > >> are pollution on the 'Net. > > > > We've done this as well. Whats wrong with letting the customer use > > their ASN and BGP peering with them in your data center? > They might > > even get a connection to someone else there and multihome again. > > Either way, the routes are getting into the global table...does the > > end of the aspath matter that much? > > It adds zero useful data to the global table, but increases > RAM, CPU, etc. on every router looking at the global table. > > Given how vociferously people argue against items in the > table which _do_ add useful data, superfluous info should be > avoided whenever possible. IMHO, of course. In the past under these circumstances, if the customer still insists on BGP after I strongly recommeded just a static DFG, I'd peer with the customer with a private AS (64512-65535). Then they usually ask me to annouce a DFG to them. Sometimes they'd want a full table. Sigh. At least they'd have the future flexibility of adding another provider without much change. I've personally done that too. Chris
|