On Sun, Jan 21, 2024, 5:39 PM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 21, 2024, at 12:07, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024, 4:55 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > wrote: > >> Sounds like you’ve got a weird mix of route origination. Why wouldn’t you >> advertise to Google via BGP and have your prefix originate from your own >> ASN? >> > > > I think in this case the customer has their own disconnected deployment, > and they are asking 396982 to announce some subset of their prefixes such > that gcp gets that traffic. > > > If that’s the case, IMHO, the better solution is to obtain a second ASN > and announce that to GCP. Create ROAs (if you want to use RPKI) > accordingly. >
That's not the product today, and really this is all accomplished with cloud goop inside gcp. (aws and azure have similar offerings, I believe) > Having Google originate prefixes on your behalf that are a subset of what > you are announcing is just asking for difficulties you don’t need. > There's a set of reasons folks choose the byoip path, I don't claim to understand them, but in the end if they want to move ipx from asn-y to asn-z some form of this operation happens. The docs and such for the cloud providers should be clear on steps, goals, problems, etc. > Owen > >
