Thanks Abhijit! That makes sense. The article wasn't quite clear enough, is all.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 2008-02-26 11:57:19 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Why does shrinking the number of addresses create 'priority' as far > > as the BGP is concerned? Is there some merit to fewer addresses, as > > opposed to more? > > Routers give priority to more specific routes over less-specific ones. > Announcing a route for 10/24 (aka the network containing 255 addresses > from 10.0.0.1 to 10.0.0.255) is "more specific" than announcing a route > for 10/16 (i.e. the 65535 addresses from 10.0.0.1 to 10.0.255.255). > > This is so that an ISP can say "Send traffic for <this whole network> to > me", while the ISP's customers can say "Send traffic for <my small part > of the ISP's network> to me" (that is, if they run BGP at all) and it > all works. > > -- ams > >
