On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Sena, Elver wrote:
> Brian,
>
> At UUNet we DO NOT advertise other ISPs IPs. We will advertise the
> customer's IPs if they own them (acquired from Arin, as mentioned by Jason).
> By the way, Jason's explanation looks accurate.
Elver,
I hate to tell this to an actual employee of the company, but "that not
true.". I know of at least 20 or so ISP's with UUnet transit, and
non-portable address space from many other providers like Sprint, CW, etc,
and you all announce it. I personally have been a UUnet transit customer
since 1995, we have multiple T1's and a DS3 with you all, and you all
announce even /24's we have from other provider. For example, head over
to nitrous.digex.net (or the looking glass of your choice) and pop in
"207.138.69.0". You will see that about a half of dozen NSP's, including
UUnet, are letting us announce this block thru them, yet it is
non-portable space from Global Crossing.
This is standard UUnet practice by the way, I am not some special case, I
am going to take a guess and assume you probably just work for Worldcom
and are not a UUnet SE.
Brian
>
> Elver
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 12:15 AM
> To: Jason T. Carnevale
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Verizon BGP
>
>
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Jason T. Carnevale wrote:
>
> > The problem is not that Verizon can not advertise another providers IP
> > space it is that Venison by policy DOES NOT route other provider's IP
> > space. What is trying to be accomplished here is that Jin Tam is
> > trying to dual home his site, which is normal. Verizon requires that a
> > customer get their own IP space from Arin to do this. Verizon is well
> > aware of the longest match rule, but to route one ISPs address space
> > to multiple ISPs, (even if it is a more specific route) is asking for
> > global routing problems, which is why Verizon and other providers do
> > not allow this. You will also find that large ISPs do not except BGP
>
> not true, just about any major backbone provider will do this for you.
>
> > routes more specific than /21. I would refer to Internet Routing
>
> some large ISP's yes. Most large NSP's no. Who am I talking
> about? Well, lets say you have a /24 from a provider, and want it
> announced from your new provider.........who will do this for you? At
> least: UUnet, Qwest, Global Crossing, ATT, Sprint, Cable and
> Wireless.....
>
> A large ISP shouldn't care, if the case is legit.........I mean, if a
> customer comes to you, and needs his /24 dual homed for redundancy, help
> him out. If you don't someone else will. Now I am not saying lets all
> get together and dump on the global table, but its not fair that companies
> like UUnet for example, blatently leak MASSIVE routes into the global
> table, routes that don't need to be there at all, routes that accomplish
> nothing (specifics of a larger UUnet aggregate to a single homed UUnet
> customer). I mean, you have to make a buck too. If UUnet cleaned up its
> routes alone, it would reduce the GLOBAL table by about 1/2%. A single
> company........reducing the memory consumption of every global router in
> the world, by doing nothing more than cleaning up its routes......that
> would equate to actual dollars saved.........
>
> Sorry for the rant. Bottom line, if an NSP won't announce your /24, go
> somewhere else that will.........there are plenty of options.......and my
> god, most of them are better options than verizon.
>
>
> > Architectures for more information on setting up a dual homed BGP
> > session with your ISP. I also must state that people that respond to
> > these types of posts should not assume all the facts are presented by
> > the poster and with that in mind should not assume that the parties
> > involved are high school idiots. Just my 2 cents.
>
> well.........I just don't think the point is valid. If Verizon announces
> the more specific route.........what has happened? One entry has been
> added to the table. If the user gets there own space, and verizon
> announces, what has happened? One entry has been added to the
> table.......Now I know, that more than likely a user dual homing is going
> to have a half dozen or more specifics, which could be replaced by a
> single ARIN allocation. But does verizon take that into consideration? I
> mean, its possible your other provider did actually give you a /21 for
> example.........and that your space is contigious, and that by going to
> ARIN you save the world nothing.
>
> Also, what do you mean exactly that to route ones ISP space to another ISP
> can cause global routing problems? I mean, so long as its done properly
> you should be ok, this is a design consideration of BGP.
>
> Once again, sorry for the long rant.
>
> Brian
>
>
> >
> > -Jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Jin Tam wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone here peer with Verizon or work for the NOC. These guys are
> >
> > > telling me that I can't advertise an address block that doesn't belong
> to
> >
> > > them. So, what the hell is the point of a BGP session if I can't
> advertise
> >
> > > the same address through 2 or more providers. Also, I pointed my
> advertised
> >
> > > address at Null0 so that there would be a route in the table. They are
> >
> > > telling me that all the traffic will be dropped at the router. I had to
> >
> > well it would, except that:
> >
> > 1. you are no doubt pointing an aggregate to null0, and the actual routes
> >
> > which have meaning are more specific.
> >
> > 2. you are using a high administrative distance on that route
> >
> > > explain to their networking team about the longest match rule. Are these
> >
> > > guys hiring high school grads for the NOC team?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
> >
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
> >
> > > _________________________________
> >
> > > UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> >
> > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> >
> > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------
> >
> > Brian Feeny, CCNP, CCDP [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Network Administrator
> >
> > ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881)
> >
> > **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
> >
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
> >
> > _________________________________
> >
> > UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> >
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> >
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Brian Feeny, CCNP, CCDP [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Network Administrator
> ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881)
>
> **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
> _________________________________
> UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
-----------------------------------------------
Brian Feeny, CCNP, CCDP [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator
ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881)
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
