RE: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
At 11:22 AM 7/24/97 -0400, root@gannett.com wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
Interesting approach. In general, the ISPs I know would be reluctant to run iBGP with a customer, unless they had total control of all BGP speakers. If I understand you correctly, the enterprise would have to tag its advertisements to the second ISP with the ASN of the first, since the enterprise doesn't have its own. Again, I think most ISPs would be reluctant to give up this amount of control.
I think most of the companies running redundant links now have their own address space and ASN. We got our primary address blocks back when a company could still do that. I think there's going to have to be some way to address that with semi-portable AS' in the near future though, as more criticality transitions to the Net.
So how do you folks punch through the infamous /19 filters? I've got a couple of clients who would like to multihome, but can't get PI space cause they can't justify 8192 addresses. Not having "fully routable" PI space negates the whole purpose of multihoming from their perspective. Does Gannett or Pointcast have >= 8K hosts exposed on their DMZ networks? I'm beginning to think there is a market for a device which has 1 Ethernet port and responds to any RANGE of addresses, so you can scam Internic into thinking you have 100% utilization of your address space, right off the bat... Eric
On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Eric Germann wrote:
negates the whole purpose of multihoming from their perspective. Does Gannett or Pointcast have >= 8K hosts exposed on their DMZ networks?
No, but we have around 8K devices using our legal address space. Just because I don't currently expose my hosts doesn't mean I don't want the option to be able to. When we registered, firewalls weren't the up-and-coming thing, but then I've also got a /23 being routed via my AS. Most of that comes from the fact that my addresses are pre-CIDR customer registered ones. Once again, it's back to the whole aggragation of routes vs. disaggragation of traffic. There, now that I've used disaggragation in a sentence, I'll sit down and shut up. Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Robertson gatekeeper@gannett.com
On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Eric Germann wrote:
At 11:22 AM 7/24/97 -0400, root@gannett.com wrote:
I'm beginning to think there is a market for a device which has 1 Ethernet port and responds to any RANGE of addresses, so you can scam Internic into thinking you have 100% utilization of your address space, right off the bat...
You can hang over 4 million secondary addresses on E0. Just a thought. Randy Benn
I'm beginning to think there is a market for a device which has 1 Ethernet port and responds to any RANGE of addresses, so you can scam Internic into thinking you have 100% utilization of your address space, right off the bat...
Yeah, because the conservation of IP space only helps InterNIC - it doesn't help you or your customers or anyone else on the Internet. Let's just use up all the address space....that'll teach the InterNIC! Kim
Eric
But there is a certain difficulty experienced by sites who are able to keep a stable prefix, but their prefix is, say /21 instead of /19. I'm not saying it's the internic's problem, or that it's sprint/agis/whomever's problem. I'm just saying that it is a problem for sites that want reliable, low latency connections to two or three providers. Oh yeah, and don't suggest the "ask one of your providers to give you a hole" solution. I've tried that. From my experience the more "special" requests you make the more likely your link is to be screwed up by human error at some point. Dean On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Kim Hubbard wrote:
I'm beginning to think there is a market for a device which has 1 Ethernet port and responds to any RANGE of addresses, so you can scam Internic into thinking you have 100% utilization of your address space, right off the bat...
Yeah, because the conservation of IP space only helps InterNIC - it doesn't help you or your customers or anyone else on the Internet. Let's just use up all the address space....that'll teach the InterNIC!
Kim
Eric
I'm beginning to think there is a market for a device which has 1 Ethernet port and responds to any RANGE of addresses, so you can scam Internic into thinking you have 100% utilization of your address space, right off the bat...
Yeah, because the conservation of IP space only helps InterNIC - it doesn't help you or your customers or anyone else on the Internet. Let's just use up all the address space....that'll teach the InterNIC!
Kim
Eric
ouch! Matthew Silvey Jr. Systems Administrator Thorn Communications, Inc. duncan@prickly.thorn.net (212) 480-3680
participants (6)
-
Dean Gaudet -
Eric Germann -
Kim Hubbard -
Matthew Silvey -
rbenn＠clark.net -
root＠gannett.com