From owner-freebsd-net Thu Jul 27 7:52: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from amazhan.bitstream.net (amazhan.bitstream.net [216.243.128.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BADE837BA63 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:51:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from airboss@bitstream.net) Received: (qmail 93508 invoked by uid 79); 27 Jul 2000 14:51:44 -0000 Received: from copper.air-boss.net (HELO copper) (216.243.168.19) by mail.bitstream.net with SMTP; 27 Jul 2000 14:51:44 -0000 Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:50:42 -0700 From: Dan Debertin X-Sender: airboss@copper.air-boss.net To: Nick Rogness Cc: Paul Herman , Albert Chin-A-Young , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Routing help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Nick Rogness wrote: > > NO, it is not too different. It is hard to work with the upstream > provider to announce anything smaller than a /24. However, some > of them do run other Routing protocols that you could > accomplish the same thing (In some cases) and they are > usually easier to work with on that level. Or maybe he's > multi-homed within the same provider... > > Either way, it's a pain in the butt to work with these people. Hey now. Keep in mind the responsibilities of your upstreams. They have around 80K BGP routes to manage; the feasibility of announcing and propagating something smaller than a /24 is laughable, when the majority of your routes are /19 and the like. Even if they did agree to run BGP out to you for your /28 (or whatever), somehow getting other providers to accept the announcement (most of whom will neither accept nor announce anything smaller than a /24) would be impossible, and undesirable, even if it were possible. The best way to do what he wants is to have a large-ish (larger than /24, anyway) netblock that is portable, i.e. obtained from ARIN or other registry, not leased from one of the upstreams, and run BGP to both, advertising a lower MED to the preferred (primary) ISP, and a higher one to the backup. Such a setup would also require an AS number. With a smaller netblock, he could run another routing protocol such as OSPF. You might run into problems if your address space isn't portable, though. It would make it technically more difficult, as well as administratively, as I doubt that ISP A will really want you advertising its prefixes to ISP B. I am making a leap in logic here, though, so correct me if this is inaccurate. ~Dan D. ++ Dan Debertin ++ Senior Systems Administrator ++ Bitstream Underground ++ airboss@bitstream.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message