At 02:44 PM 3/22/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Yes, I am speaking about routing on the internet with BGP-4. If I am a
>carrier that has 1 AS and I purchase another network (that has multiple
>ASes) from another carrier, should I integrate them into a single AS, or
>keep them as multiple AS? It is not that I want to have multiple AS,
>however, I will have them via the acquisition. The question is should I keep
>them separate, or migrate them into one. What added benefit do I get if I
>have one?
generally, having one helps others have a consistent view of your routing
policy. It also conserves resources.
>A second question is if 1 AS is so great, why do Sprint, WorldCom,
>AT&T, and Genuity all have multiple AS?
part of this, of course, is historical, and involves acquisitions.
Some might even argue that there just needs to be one AS, that of
WorldCom -- everything else will eventually be in it. I do know people
at what variously has been BBN, then GTE, then Verizon who legitimately
boast "We're AS 1 and proud of it!"
There is some value, however, to having things split on a continental
level. Most UUnet AS of which I am aware are at the continental level.
At one time, Sprint used a separate AS for each POP, but no one would
do things that way any longer. It doesn't buy them anything and makes
global routing more obscure.
>Sonia
>
>
>
>_________________________________
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
