To EVERYONE who has contacted me offlist regarding my being so hard on Jay: If this company were truely revelational, my WIFE would have told me about it and I would not have ready about them for the first time on NANOG. They are letting their marketing monkeys run wild, duping unknowing customers into thinking they're getting something better than ANY other provider can give them. By design, their network depends on BGP4 because they depend on TRANSIT from other providers. If they had peering relationships with "God and everybody", "Everywhere", perhaps their new, fangled technology would have some benefit. As it stands, from what I can grep from their "marketing s^&#%&t".....er.....website, they have NOTHING to offer that SAVVIS/INTERNAP/(every other like-type provider) have to offer besides perhaps the fact that their network will be faster until they inevitably grow beyone capacity at which time, their marketing types will announce their new "OC-10,1000" network buildout with an estimated turnup date of 1/1/3000. Beyond that, I'm _REALLY_ sick of people pissing and moaning about NAPS being congestion points. If you're so tired of the exchange point being slow, INVEST IN MAKING IT FASTER!!!!! It's _NOT_ that hard. It's to _YOUR_ benefit. Moral of the mini-tangent: It's not the NAP, it's the OPERATOR. If they're too greedy to invest in infrastructure, you should investigate alternatives, At the same time, those of you with pipes trying to run at 150% to the exchange points should be ashamed! Someone shoot me when money becomes more important to me than the performance of my network. So, basically, what we're looking at is "Same s%^t, different company name." Jay: _PLEASE_ show different. I'll gladly be shown to be wrong. I'm not holding my breath though. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
John- Calm down and cut Jay some slack. Everyone is guilty at one time or another of letting their Marketing Dept get the best of them. For example, Enterzone/EZ-Hosting seems to have been bitten by the same bug. Im not sure if you have seen the Enterzone website lately, but there are claims of having "Cisco 7500 series routers " and various "Cisco switch" models. After a few quick show versions from your stats.cmh-ix.net and nitrous.enterzone.net, I have found the following: Zebra 0.89a (i686-pc-linux-gnu). Copyright 1996-2000, Kunihiro Ishiguro. Border-Core0-BGP (border AND core all in one box? Neat! Some people try to separate their border from their core from their edge from their aggregation boxes, but this is an interesting idea... Put it all on one RedHat box running Zebra) Zebra 0.90 (mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu). Copyright 1996-2000, Kunihiro Ishiguro. CMH-IX_Route_Server-1 Zebra 0.90 (mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu). Copyright 1996-2000, Kunihiro Ishiguro. CMH-IX_Route_Server-2 Those dont look to be Cisco 75xx routers to me. BTW, how is the HP ProCurve holding up? Trying 209.115.127.22... Connected to 209.115.127.22. Escape character is '^]'. SSH-1.5-1.2.27 Time to upgrade that SSH rev on the "border-core-0" John. Check out Securityfocus or packetstorm to see the vulnerabilities that are public in your current operational rev of SSH. -troy On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
To EVERYONE who has contacted me offlist regarding my being so hard on Jay:
< trifling message chopped...>
Sold??? 360networks Snags NetRail http://www.broadbandweek.com/newsdirect/0102/direct010220.htm
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Roy wrote:
Sold???
360networks Snags NetRail
http://www.broadbandweek.com/newsdirect/0102/direct010220.htm
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
<> Nathan Stratton CTO, Exario Networks, Inc. nathan@robotics.net nathan@exario.net http://www.robotics.net http://www.exario.net
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Roy wrote:
Sold???
360networks Snags NetRail
http://www.broadbandweek.com/newsdirect/0102/direct010220.htm
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
And exactly which part of your mess do you think I haven't cleaned up yet? Pray do tell. Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
And exactly which part of your mess do you think I haven't cleaned up yet? Pray do tell.
Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
Wow. Do we get front row seats to the title fight? Tim
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Timothy Brown wrote:
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
And exactly which part of your mess do you think I haven't cleaned up yet? Pray do tell.
Wow. Do we get front row seats to the title fight?
I don't think there will be much of a fight, Nathan is bouncing all mail from netrail.net. It's just as well, I didn't really want to fill NANOG with off topic garbage, I just couldn't let it go without a response. Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Brandon Ross wrote:
I don't think there will be much of a fight, Nathan is bouncing all mail from netrail.net. It's just as well, I didn't really want to fill NANOG with off topic garbage, I just couldn't let it go without a response.
#1 I don't think NANOG is the place and #2 I have no problem with you or anything you are doing at Netrail. You are not one of the people that took NetRail from me. As far as the email, I have no interest in talking to anyone at Netrail as sendmail will say when you try to send me email. You frankly have no idea how the company was sold, I bet they said that they actually paid me for the thing. I am sure you guys disclosed to 360 that the fonder never received a dime for NetRail and that there is a good possibility that he can prove fraud and ownership to a very large chunk of stock. Anyway, I think I have used enough NANOG bandwidth with this crap, I just can't resist a little slam now and then. -Nathan
One reason why I thought the name should have been changed long ago. The only thing about Netrail that is legacy is the name. There is nothing left from the original company of long ago and a name change would have helped show that. The people there have helped bring it a long way and deserve the credit for doing so. It brings up the interesting point of when do the people that are there start getting the credit instead of a former founder that has not had anything to do with the company for 4 years. I mean that as a general topic not just relating to Netrail. As far as this deal going Im sure that 360 got a hell of a head start on an IP network by their purchase and Netrail found a good home. Nice to see happy endings on the net. My hats off to the Netrail team. Especial congrats to Nathan E, Mark, Keith and Brandon. I also hope Scott P never decides to flame me on a lis, apparently he has a talent. I hope you all are getting 360network Porsches. Once again congrats gentlemen, my hats off to you. It was an honor and a pleasure to serve with you all. David At 12:25 AM -0500 2/21/01, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Brandon Ross wrote:
I don't think there will be much of a fight, Nathan is bouncing all mail from netrail.net. It's just as well, I didn't really want to fill NANOG with off topic garbage, I just couldn't let it go without a response.
#1 I don't think NANOG is the place and #2 I have no problem with you or anything you are doing at Netrail. You are not one of the people that took NetRail from me. As far as the email, I have no interest in talking to anyone at Netrail as sendmail will say when you try to send me email. You frankly have no idea how the company was sold, I bet they said that they actually paid me for the thing.
I am sure you guys disclosed to 360 that the fonder never received a dime for NetRail and that there is a good possibility that he can prove fraud and ownership to a very large chunk of stock.
Anyway, I think I have used enough NANOG bandwidth with this crap, I just can't resist a little slam now and then.
-Nathan
-- Thank you, David Diaz Chairman, iCEO International Wire Communications, Inc. www.iwcinc.net www.smoton.net 305-273-7978 email: davediaz@iwcinc.net, dave@smoton.net pager: pagedave@iwcinc.net ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Why ride the light when you can surf a wave!"
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, David Diaz wrote:
One reason why I thought the name should have been changed long ago. The only thing about Netrail that is legacy is the name. There is nothing left from the original company of long ago and a name change would have helped show that. The people there have helped bring it a long way and deserve the credit for doing so. It brings up the interesting point of when do the people that are there start getting the credit instead of a former founder that has not had anything to do with the company for 4 years. I mean that as a general topic not just relating to Netrail.
All you guys did was add money to what I built. You are selling because of the peering that I set up. Sure you expanded on that a lot, but I am the guy who got NetRail transit free.
As far as this deal going Im sure that 360 got a hell of a head start on an IP network by their purchase and Netrail found a good home. Nice to see happy endings on the net.
Well happy endings are when I get paid for my company. What 360 wants what I built, not what you guys did after I left.
My hats off to the Netrail team. Especial congrats to Nathan E, Mark, Keith and Brandon. I also hope Scott P never decides to flame me on a lis, apparently he has a talent. I hope you all are getting 360network Porsches.
Nathan E and Keith are great guys, I am the guy who hired them and get them into this business. P.S. Nathan E and Keith, I do hope you get your Porsches, you guys have come a very very long way in 5 years. I wish I made some money from NetRail, but I was albe to buy my Porsche and house without NetRail and would love to race someday in Atlanta. I may not win in my Boxster S, but my new 911 GT3 will blow you away. :-) -Nathan
<last rant> I am not one of the guys "there" and do not take credit for their work. I wont bother arguing the same comments that are posted once a year. It would probably bring up the argument of defining transit free and tier1. Im not sure a arguing a company with 4 T1s and limited public peering was tier1. I think there is a bit more there and it was not a "little" evolution. That credit goes to the 185 some odd employees there today "making it happen." I think it's wrong to cheapen the efforts of all those who put in the hours there to take it to 50 facilities and overbuild the network at least 4 times since. Anyone want to remember gated and those old GRF routers? To all the peers that peered with Netrail when a BGP session bounced, and just gave us a nod instead of a shout... you deserve some thanks also. I would like to believe some of the lessons learned from the GRFs ended up reincarnated in todays Junipers. At 12:19 AM -0500 2/22/01, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, David Diaz wrote:
One reason why I thought the name should have been changed long ago. The only thing about Netrail that is legacy is the name. There is nothing left from the original company of long ago and a name change would have helped show that. The people there have helped bring it a long way and deserve the credit for doing so. It brings up the interesting point of when do the people that are there start getting the credit instead of a former founder that has not had anything to do with the company for 4 years. I mean that as a general topic not just relating to Netrail.
All you guys did was add money to what I built. You are selling because of the peering that I set up. Sure you expanded on that a lot, but I am the guy who got NetRail transit free.
As far as this deal going Im sure that 360 got a hell of a head start on an IP network by their purchase and Netrail found a good home. Nice to see happy endings on the net.
Well happy endings are when I get paid for my company. What 360 wants what I built, not what you guys did after I left.
My hats off to the Netrail team. Especial congrats to Nathan E, Mark, Keith and Brandon. I also hope Scott P never decides to flame me on a lis, apparently he has a talent. I hope you all are getting 360network Porsches.
Nathan E and Keith are great guys, I am the guy who hired them and get them into this business.
P.S. Nathan E and Keith, I do hope you get your Porsches, you guys have come a very very long way in 5 years. I wish I made some money from NetRail, but I was albe to buy my Porsche and house without NetRail and would love to race someday in Atlanta. I may not win in my Boxster S, but my new 911 GT3 will blow you away. :-)
-Nathan
All you guys did was add money to what I built. You are selling because of the peering that I set up. Sure you expanded on that a lot, but I am the guy who got NetRail transit free.
Sure, you keep telling yourself that, and i'm sure you'll sleep well at night.
Well happy endings are when I get paid for my company. What 360 wants what I built, not what you guys did after I left.
If all it will take is to pay you for the GRF's that you had installed before you left, tell me where to make out the check. Or, I could just send them to you......I've seen them on ebay for about $50.00/each......I know thats high for a pair of saw horses, but it would help you remember the good days and possibly start your next company...........Don't forget the shipping address, I'll just have them dropped shipped right to your doorstep, so it doesn't inconvenience you (Be REAL careful with the small, brown un-marked box though) Thats all of the flash cards ;)
P.S. Nathan E and Keith, I do hope you get your Porsches, you guys have come a very very long way in 5 years. I wish I made some money from NetRail, but I was albe to buy my Porsche and house without NetRail and would love to race someday in Atlanta. I may not win in my Boxster S, but my new 911 GT3 will blow you away. :-)
-Nathan
Just let me know when your in town and we'll take em out for a spin.........Hummer Vs. Porsche, i've always wanted to see that! Scott
The smart money is on Brandon... - Daniel Golding On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Timothy Brown wrote:
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
And exactly which part of your mess do you think I haven't cleaned up yet? Pray do tell.
Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
Wow. Do we get front row seats to the title fight?
Tim
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 11:08:58PM -0500, Brandon Ross wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Roy wrote:
Sold???
360networks Snags NetRail
http://www.broadbandweek.com/newsdirect/0102/direct010220.htm
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
And exactly which part of your mess do you think I haven't cleaned up yet? Pray do tell.
Netrail's unnecessary deaggregated routes. BGP table version is 548878, local router ID is 216.74.127.225 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path --snip-- * 64.253.0.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 64.253.9.0/24 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 64.253.10.0/24 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce two /24s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /19? --snip-- * 131.226.0.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 131.226.0.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 131.226.32.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 131.226.64.0/19 63.211.88.5 100 0 3356 4006 i * 131.226.96.0/19 63.211.88.5 100 0 3356 4006 i * 131.226.128.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce four /19s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /16? --snip-- * 205.215.0.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 205.215.11.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.14.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 205.215.36.0 63.211.88.5 100 0 3356 4006 i * 205.215.37.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.38.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.42.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.44.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.48.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.51.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.52.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.55.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 205.215.56.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.57.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.58.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.62.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce fifteen /24s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? --snip-- * 207.31.64.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.72.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.74.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.76.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.81.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.82.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.83.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.84.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.87.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.92.0/22 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.96.0/21 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.104.0/21 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.115.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.118.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.120.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.123.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce twelve /24s, two /21s, and one /22 terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? --snip-- * 207.153.64.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.153.72.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.73.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.74.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.75.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.84.0/23 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.90.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.92.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.93.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.98.0/23 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.102.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.104.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.108.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.110.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.111.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.115.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.121.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.153.122.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.124.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.153.127.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce seventeen /24s, and two /23s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? --snip-- * 209.44.64.0/23 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.64.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 209.44.66.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.68.0/22 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.72.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.76.0/22 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.81.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.82.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 209.44.85.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.87.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.114.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.116.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.127.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce nine /24s, two /22s, and one /23 terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? And I won't even start on the other ASes hanging off of NetRail...
Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
-- Omachonu Ogali missnglnk@informationwave.net http://www.informationwave.net
<Disclaimer> Please don't flame me if I am doing something wrong. Just tell me how to do it better. </Disclaimer> We are advertising 2 /20 which can be (theoretically) aggregated to one /19 route-server.cerf.net>sh ip bgp 200.62.0.0 BGP routing table entry for 200.62.0.0/20, version 5199340 Paths: (4 available, best #3) Not advertised to any peer 1740 4006 18747 198.32.176.25 from 198.32.176.25 (134.24.127.39) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external 1740 4006 18747 192.41.177.69 from 192.41.177.69 (134.24.127.131) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external 1740 4006 18747 192.157.69.5 from 192.157.69.5 (134.24.127.201) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external, best 1740 4006 18747 134.24.88.55 from 134.24.88.55 (134.24.127.27) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external route-server.cerf.net>sh ip bgp 200.62.16.0 BGP routing table entry for 200.62.16.0/20, version 5199341 Paths: (4 available, best #1) Not advertised to any peer 1740 4006 18747 192.157.69.5 from 192.157.69.5 (134.24.127.201) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external, best 1740 4006 18747 198.32.176.25 from 198.32.176.25 (134.24.127.39) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external 1740 4006 18747 192.41.177.69 from 192.41.177.69 (134.24.127.131) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external 1740 4006 18747 134.24.88.55 from 134.24.88.55 (134.24.127.27) Origin IGP, metric 20, localpref 100, valid, external route-server.cerf.net> The reason for doing this is simple: First /20 is in US, second /20 is in VE and I want to advertise Venezuelan part (and only this) to some local VE provider in addition to NetRail. If I would advertise aggregated /19 to NetRail, I would receive all traffic for this multihomed /20 only from second VE provider, as more specific advertisement would be preferred in route selection process. Maybe they are doing the same. Przemek -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Omachonu Ogali Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 9:56 AM To: Brandon Ross Subject: Re: Network for Sale On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 11:08:58PM -0500, Brandon Ross wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Roy wrote:
Sold???
360networks Snags NetRail
http://www.broadbandweek.com/newsdirect/0102/direct010220.htm
If they do I bet they don't know what they are getting into. NetRail still has a mess in the past that they need to clean up before they start fixing the current mess they have.
And exactly which part of your mess do you think I haven't cleaned up yet? Pray do tell.
Netrail's unnecessary deaggregated routes. BGP table version is 548878, local router ID is 216.74.127.225 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path --snip-- * 64.253.0.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 64.253.9.0/24 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 64.253.10.0/24 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce two /24s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /19? --snip-- * 131.226.0.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 131.226.0.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 131.226.32.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 131.226.64.0/19 63.211.88.5 100 0 3356 4006 i * 131.226.96.0/19 63.211.88.5 100 0 3356 4006 i * 131.226.128.0/19 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce four /19s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /16? --snip-- * 205.215.0.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 205.215.11.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.14.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 205.215.36.0 63.211.88.5 100 0 3356 4006 i * 205.215.37.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.38.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.42.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.44.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.48.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.51.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.52.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.55.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 205.215.56.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.57.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.58.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 205.215.62.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce fifteen /24s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? --snip-- * 207.31.64.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.72.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.74.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.76.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.81.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.82.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.83.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.84.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.87.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.92.0/22 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.96.0/21 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.104.0/21 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.115.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.118.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.31.120.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.31.123.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce twelve /24s, two /21s, and one /22 terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? --snip-- * 207.153.64.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.153.72.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.73.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.74.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.75.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.84.0/23 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.90.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.92.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.93.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.98.0/23 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.102.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.104.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.108.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.110.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.111.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.115.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.121.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.153.122.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 207.153.124.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 207.153.127.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce seventeen /24s, and two /23s terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? --snip-- * 209.44.64.0/23 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.64.0/18 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 209.44.66.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.68.0/22 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.72.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.76.0/22 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.81.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.82.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 ? * 209.44.85.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.87.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.114.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.116.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i * 209.44.127.0 157.130.59.13 100 0 701 4006 i --snip-- Why announce nine /24s, two /22s, and one /23 terminating at the same AS out of the larger /18? And I won't even start on the other ASes hanging off of NetRail...
Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
-- Omachonu Ogali missnglnk@informationwave.net http://www.informationwave.net
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Przemyslaw Karwasiecki wrote:
<Disclaimer> Please don't flame me if I am doing something wrong. Just tell me how to do it better. </Disclaimer>
I wouldn't do that.
The reason for doing this is simple: First /20 is in US, second /20 is in VE and I want to advertise Venezuelan part (and only this) to some local VE provider in addition to NetRail.
If I would advertise aggregated /19 to NetRail, I would receive all traffic for this multihomed /20 only from second VE provider, as more specific advertisement would be preferred in route selection process.
You are absolutely right, and we do, indeed, have several customers that fit this sort of need. One question, though, do you have a need for full transit from the second VE provider, or is it really more for a peering like relationship? If it's just that VE provider's traffic you are looking to optimize for that /20, you might consider sending the /20 to the VE provider with no-export set and sending the whole /19 to us. It would reduce the number of routes the whole internet has to see. Also, it would probably be better to send NetRail the /20 used in VE, and the whole /19 instead of 2 /20's. It's a very minor enhancement, if any at all, but people don't complain as much about smaller routes being advertised inside of larger routes as compared to obvious aggregations like 2 /20's. Not a big deal, but something to think about. Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!
participants (12)
-
Brandon Ross -
Daniel L. Golding -
David Diaz -
John Butler -
John Fraizer -
Nathan Stratton -
Omachonu Ogali -
Przemyslaw Karwasiecki -
Roy -
Scott Patterson -
Timothy Brown -
Troy Corbin