At 11:39 AM 6/9/97 PDT, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
Larry,
Are you saying that a /19 wouldn't put less load on the _system_ than the current situation + another block?
Our /23 and /21 are from UUNET, our primary provider. ACSI is secondary provider.
Teach me (read: offer your constructive criticism). I'm willing to learn.
Load on the routing system could be reduced if you would take a block of addresses from UUNET, and a block of addresses from ACSI, number some of your customers out of the UUNET block, some of your customers out of the ACSI block, and then use something along the lines of "auto injection" (see draft-bates-multihoming-00.txt) to handle fallback connectivity.
Yakov.
Yakov, Thanks for the constructive input. I'll try to locate the full URL and we're interested in evaluating and following your suggestion. Will this meet the InterNIC guidelines of "no favored connection"? Regards, Larry Vaden, founder and CEO help-desk 903-813-4500 Internet Texoma, Inc. <http://www.texoma.net> direct 903-870-0365 bringing the real Internet to rural Texomaland fax 903-868-8551 Member ISP/C, TISPA and USIPA pager 903-867-6571