On Mar 24, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Mar 24, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Zaid Ali <z...@zaidali.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have seen age old discussions on single AS vs multiple AS for backbone
>>> and datacenter design. I am particularly interested in operational
>>> challenges for running AS per region e.g. one AS for US, one EU etc or I
>>> have heard folks do one AS per DC. I particularly don't see any advantage
>>> in doing one AS per region or datacenter since most of the reasons I hear
>>> is to reduce the iBGP mesh. I generally prefer one AS and making use of
>>> confederation.
>>
>> If you have good backbone between the locations, then, it's mostly a matter
>> of personal preference. If you have discreet autonomous sites that are not
>> connected by internal circuits (not VPNs), then, AS per site is greatly
>> preferable.
>
> We disagree.
> Single AS worldwide is fine with or without a backbone.
> Which is "preferable" is up to you, your situation, and your personal tastes.
We're with Patrick on this one. We operate a single AS across seventy-some-odd
locations in dozens of countries, with very little of what an eyeball operator
would call "backbone" between them, and we've never seen any potential benefit
from splitting them. I think the management headache alone would be sufficient
to make it unattractive to us.
-Bill
