-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Christopher L. Morrow Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 6:19 PM To: Michael Smith Cc: Warren Kumari, Ph.D, CCIE# 9190; Nanog Subject: Re: The Cidr Report
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Michael Smith wrote:
From: "Warren Kumari, Ph.D, CCIE# 9190" <warren@kumari.net> On Feb 13, 2005, at 2:31 AM, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
That and the "I have 1 circuit to $good_provider and 1 circuit to $bad_provider and the only way I can make them balance is to split my space in half and announce more specifics out through each provider" argument. I have also often seen people do this without announcing the aggregate because <some undefined bad thing> will happen, usually justified with much hand-waving. The people who do this can usually not be reasoned with....
So, say I'm a provider that has received a /22 from UUNet (just for example Chris :-) ) and I now get another transit provider and announce the /22 there. So, I call UUNet and ask them to announce the /22 as a more specific
Meaning you have PA space from UUNET, and you have BGP so you can multi-home... I'd expect you to know how to deaggregate yourself. You MIGHT even know how to send no-export on deaggregated prefixes, or use the 1996 policies to influence preferences/prepends internal to 701, yes?
Is aggregation being covered in the Sunday BoF's? [ hint, hint ] -M<