[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Todd Vierling) wrote: > Tier-2s should be given much more credit than they typically are in > write-ups like this. When a customer is single homed to a tier-2 that has > multiple tier-1 upstreams, and uses a delegated netblock from the tier-2's > aggregations, that means one less ASN and one or more less routes in the > global table.
That's the operators' view, but not the customer's. The customer wants redundancy. So we should try to find a way to tell them "Hey, it's mostly Tier-1's (or wannabes) that play such games, stick to a trustworthy Tier-2. And, hey, btw., connect redundantly to them, so you have line failure resiliency and also a competent partner that cares for everything else." Only seeing the operators' view will amount to nothing in the customer's will to run along with the Tier-2. Eventually, it breaks down to trust. And customers learn that the "big players" are not always trustworthy. Oh, and customers do not always remember names. Yours, Elmar. -- "Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren." (PLemken, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---