thats new, looks like they amended it!
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002, Daniel Roesen wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 08:46:07PM +, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
> > > As far as aggregation - they are a couple reasons to not aggregate, but
> > > the vast majority of it is sloth.
> >
> > like to meet C&W
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 08:46:07PM +, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
> > As far as aggregation - they are a couple reasons to not aggregate, but
> > the vast majority of it is sloth.
>
> like to meet C&W peering policy etc?
http://www1.cw.com/template_05.jsp?ID=peer_03
"aggregation is encouraged,
ASN per LATA to abide by the Telco Act of 1996...
SBC is rapidly shrinking the need down to a handful. 4 ASNs are in use at
IXs today. Next year that should be cut in half.
http://www.sbcbackbone.net/peering/
-ren
At 03:14 PM 11/13/2002 -0600, Daniel Golding wrote:
Actually, most of the RB
> Aren't some reasons for using disconnected as's regulatory
> based ie the
> bells etc?
>
As far as I've seen they do the right thing and use multiple ASNs.
Kris
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > > > inherently wrong with using a single AS in multiple
> locations,
Actually, most of the RBOC/ILEC's use completely seperate AS's. "FCC
Regulation" being a legitimate reason to request a whole bushel of AS's
from ARIN.
Try doing an ARIN whois on bellsouth, and you get...
Bellsouth.Net (AS7891) BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK27891 - 7894
Bellsouth.Net (AS8060) BELLSOUTH-N
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Daniel Golding wrote:
> I suppose that depends on how many static routes you would need, and how
> many routers you would have to touch.
>
> If you have 10 sites like this, and add or remove several blocks every day
> (an extreme, of course), then you could end up manipulat
Aren't some reasons for using disconnected as's regulatory based ie the
bells etc?
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > inherently wrong with using a single AS in multiple locations, and
> > > advertising discrete blocks of address space in each one. The best reason
> > > to do
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 03:49:53PM -0500, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>
> > Just making sure Ralph knows this, since I'm sure achieving 99% peering
> > by getting 10GE into NYIIX is the goal for his OC192 over 2600 network. :)
>
> Trying to run
I suppose that depends on how many static routes you would need, and how
many routers you would have to touch.
If you have 10 sites like this, and add or remove several blocks every day
(an extreme, of course), then you could end up manipulating many statics
on numerous routers, which, aside fro
rding larger prefixes to make their
network appear like something it isn't.
-Adam
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-nanog@;merit.edu]On Behalf Of
Ralph Doncaster
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 11:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: disconnected autonomous system
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> Just making sure Ralph knows this, since I'm sure achieving 99% peering
> by getting 10GE into NYIIX is the goal for his OC192 over 2600 network. :)
Trying to run OC192 over a 2600 router would make more business sense than
giving away 250mbps
> > inherently wrong with using a single AS in multiple locations, and
> > advertising discrete blocks of address space in each one. The best reason
> > to do this is for a network that you eventually plan to merge - it
> > eliminates issues of having to make major BGP configuration changes.
>
>
own thing but dont complain when providers start filtering your routes and
ignoring your prefixes!
Steve
>
> - Daniel Golding
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> >
> > I've found there are many providers that have completely disconnect
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Daniel Golding wrote:
[...]
> As far as aggregation - they are a couple reasons to not aggregate, but
> the vast majority of it is sloth.
[...]
I've never seen anyone here complain that Yipes de-aggregates
66.7.128.0/18 into /24's like 66.7.129.0/24. Until the bigger provid
DG> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:28:07 -0600 (CST)
DG> From: Daniel Golding
DG> Of course, it required you to point default routes out your
DG> upstreams, as you will not see the prefixes from one
DG> discontiguous island, in another, thanks to BGP loop
DG> detection.
router bgp
neighbor allowa
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 02:28:07PM -0600, Daniel Golding wrote:
>
> As long as you are familiar with the pitfalls, there is nothing
> inherently wrong with using a single AS in multiple locations, and
> advertising discrete blocks of address space in each one. The best reason
> to do this is for
knows that vocal isn't always correct.
- Daniel Golding
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> I've found there are many providers that have completely disconnected
> autonomous systems. For example Yipes (6517) uses L3 on the west coast
> and Williams on th
Depends on which weed:).
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, E.B. Dreger wrote:
>
> RD> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:46:05 -0500 (EST)
> RD> From: Ralph Doncaster
>
>
> RD> And the number of connected autonomous systems with
> RD> de-aggregated prefixes appears to be even more common than a
> RD> disconnected AS
RD> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:46:05 -0500 (EST)
RD> From: Ralph Doncaster
RD> And the number of connected autonomous systems with
RD> de-aggregated prefixes appears to be even more common than a
RD> disconnected AS.
I see many weed-filled yards. Must mean weeds are acceptable,
even desirable,
I've found there are many providers that have completely disconnected
autonomous systems. For example Yipes (6517) uses L3 on the west coast
and Williams on the east coast.
66.7.129.0/24 is advertised under their AS through WCG and
209.213.209.0/24 is advertised under their AS through L3.
20 matches
Mail list logo
