[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Todd Vierling) wrote:
> Tier-2s should be given much more credit than they typically are in
> write-ups like this. When a customer is single homed to a tier-2 that has
> multiple tier-1 upstreams, and uses a delegated netblock from the tier-2's
> aggregations, that means one less ASN and one or more less routes in the
> global table.
That's the operators' view, but not the customer's.
The customer wants redundancy.
So we should try to find a way to tell them "Hey, it's mostly Tier-1's
(or wannabes) that play such games, stick to a trustworthy Tier-2.
And, hey, btw., connect redundantly to them, so you have line failure
resiliency and also a competent partner that cares for everything else."
Only seeing the operators' view will amount to nothing in the customer's
will to run along with the Tier-2.
Eventually, it breaks down to trust. And customers learn that the "big
players" are not always trustworthy. Oh, and customers do not always
remember names.
Yours,
Elmar.
--
"Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren."
(PLemken, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
--------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
