On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Michael Smith <mksmith@mac.com> wrote:
I guess I'm confused. I have a /32 that I have broken up into /47's for my discrete POP locations. I don't have a network between them, by design. And, I won't announce the /32 covering route because there is no single POP that can take requests for the entire /32 - think regionalized anycast.
So, how is it "worse" to announce the deaggregated /47's versus getting a /32 for every POP? In either case, I'm going to put the same number of routes into the DFZ.
Hi Michael, If you announce an ISP /32 from each POP (or an end-user /48, /47, etc) then I know that a neutral third party has vetted your proposed network configuration and confirmed that the routes are disaggregated because the network architecture requires it. If you announce a /47 from your ISP space, for all I know you're trying to tweak utilization on your ISP uplinks. In the former case, the protocols are capable of what they're capable of. Discrete multihomed network, discrete announcement. Like it or lump it. In the latter case, I don't particularly need to burn resources on my router half a world away to facilitate your traffic tweaking. Let the ISPs you're paying for the privilege carry your more-specifics. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004