Vadim Antonov writes:
In my (rather extensive) practice, multihoming by itself is usually a major source of connectivity problems.
Agreed.
Whoever arguing _for_ mulihoming for everyone forgets that taking more routing information in has dangers not present when you don't do routing yourself.
I never saw any customer who had the ability to configure a multihomed site properly on their own; and most of the bogus routing information comes from multihomed customer sites.
It is _much_ better to multihome to the same provider who then can take care of messy global routing.
Agreed. The arguement here (if there is one) is that their is a demand in the marketplace for multihoming to different providers and what is the best way to treat these customers. Sprint's filtering is a good arguement for having multiple Sprint connections or non at all. The customer that is multihomed to Sprint and a different provider, however, is still paying Sprint to move their bits around even if their Sprint connection goes down. I support all incentives to reduce the number of multihomed customers.
--vadim
PS A UPS for CPE usually fixes 95% of transmission problems. I've seen people willing to spend money on multihoming but doing things on commercial power.
And not plugging their routers into outlets on light switches would also help. -Hank