I hate using NANOG as a NOC of last resort, but it looks like this is my best option. We recently migrated our IP connectivity to UU-Net/MCI/whatever you want to call them these days. I've migrated the majority of our BGP topology collection feeds to the new IP space (anyone want to give us your routes?) and decided that now we're a UU-Net customer, I'd try to get a feed from UU-Net. Apparently they only want to feed our border router, not the route collection host. If anyone has any suggestions on who to deal with at UU-Net that might have a little more clue on this type of situation, it would be appreciated. -- Jeff Haas NextHop Technologies
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:25:14AM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
I hate using NANOG as a NOC of last resort, but it looks like this is my best option.
We recently migrated our IP connectivity to UU-Net/MCI/whatever you want to call them these days. I've migrated the majority of our BGP topology collection feeds to the new IP space (anyone want to give us your routes?) and decided that now we're a UU-Net customer, I'd try to get a feed from UU-Net.
Apparently they only want to feed our border router, not the route collection host.
If anyone has any suggestions on who to deal with at UU-Net that might have a little more clue on this type of situation, it would be appreciated.
I don't believe that AS701 does it. I seem to recall this from hearing about some very complicated process that had to be completed for route-views.oregon-ix.net to get their AS701 feed. This may no longer be the case but seeings as the feed isn't there anymore, i'm guessing they still don't do this. Make your cpe router speak bgp with them, then have that peer with your collector. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
AS701 has a published policy of never initiating BGP sessions with multihop > 2. I'd be very surprised if you're able to get them to change it for you: once you're in the multihop world, security and load issues become more complex, and large networks don't particularly want to deal with those headaches if they can help it. Maybe you could offer to pay them more per hop? ;) -David Barak no I DON'T work for AS 701 anymore... --- Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:25:14AM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
I hate using NANOG as a NOC of last resort, but it
looks like this is
my best option.
We recently migrated our IP connectivity to UU-Net/MCI/whatever you want to call them these days. I've migrated the majority of our BGP topology collection feeds to the new IP space (anyone want to give us your routes?) and decided that now we're a UU-Net customer, I'd try to get a feed from UU-Net.
Apparently they only want to feed our border router, not the route collection host.
If anyone has any suggestions on who to deal with at UU-Net that might have a little more clue on this type of situation, it would be appreciated.
I don't believe that AS701 does it. I seem to recall this from hearing about some very complicated process that had to be completed for route-views.oregon-ix.net to get their AS701 feed.
This may no longer be the case but seeings as the feed isn't there anymore, i'm guessing they still don't do this.
Make your cpe router speak bgp with them, then have that peer with your collector.
- jared
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
===== David Barak -fully RFC 1925 compliant- __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com
Or tunnel it from your edge to only give 2 hops :) On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, David Barak wrote:
AS701 has a published policy of never initiating BGP sessions with multihop > 2.
I'd be very surprised if you're able to get them to change it for you: once you're in the multihop world, security and load issues become more complex, and large networks don't particularly want to deal with those headaches if they can help it. Maybe you could offer to pay them more per hop? ;)
-David Barak no I DON'T work for AS 701 anymore...
--- Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:25:14AM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
I hate using NANOG as a NOC of last resort, but it
looks like this is
my best option.
We recently migrated our IP connectivity to UU-Net/MCI/whatever you want to call them these days. I've migrated the majority of our BGP topology collection feeds to the new IP space (anyone want to give us your routes?) and decided that now we're a UU-Net customer, I'd try to get a feed from UU-Net.
Apparently they only want to feed our border router, not the route collection host.
If anyone has any suggestions on who to deal with at UU-Net that might have a little more clue on this type of situation, it would be appreciated.
I don't believe that AS701 does it. I seem to recall this from hearing about some very complicated process that had to be completed for route-views.oregon-ix.net to get their AS701 feed.
This may no longer be the case but seeings as the feed isn't there anymore, i'm guessing they still don't do this.
Make your cpe router speak bgp with them, then have that peer with your collector.
- jared
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
===== David Barak -fully RFC 1925 compliant-
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com
I don't believe that AS701 does it. I seem to recall this from
hearing about some very complicated process that had to be completed for route-views.oregon-ix.net to get their AS701 feed.
This may no longer be the case but seeings as the feed isn't there anymore, i'm guessing they still don't do this.
I know for a fact that it can be done. I have had this set up with AS701 when we were a customer (>4 years ago). Everything about our set up with them was very specific and broke a lot of their rules because of the kind of usage we were putting on them -- they made a lot of exceptions for us. I am sure none of the guys that were helpful then are still there now, and moreover, I am not sure if it was because of our size that they were able to make the exception. I am just chiming in because I know that the exception has been made on more than one occassion for us. In fact, we have had BGP views (EBGP-multihop) from several core routers backhauled to us at different times, and for different reasons. This is all ancient history though. Deepak Jain AiNET
participants (5)
-
David Barak -
Deepak Jain -
Jared Mauch -
Jeffrey Haas -
Stephen J. Wilcox