On 5/12/26 7:49 AM, Mark Tinka via NANOG wrote:
On 08/05/2026 22:12, Seth Mattinen via NANOG wrote:
I personally don't mix transit and peering duties on the same device. I have a dedicated router for peering sessions and a dedicated router for each transit provider. I find it easier to manage and it limits scope if one of them has a problem or needs an update since it only affects its own playground.
This.
A dedicated peering router also ensures you eliminate providing transit to a peer if you make a configuration error, as the peering router neither carries the DFZ nor 0/0, ::/0.
Mark.
100% -- we do this too. In a pinch we've done "peering in a VRF", but I wouldn't recommend it. It's a pain in the ass to set up, and an even bigger pain to troubleshoot if you don't understand how it works. Plus it doesn't scale.