-----Original Message----- From: Blake Dunlap [mailto:iki...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 4:00 PM To: n...@flhsi.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Nick Olsen <n...@flhsi.com> wrote: > I hear you guys, It's done that way for a bit of traffic steering. > > If I could get away with just the aggregates I would, Trust me. > > Nick Olsen > Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106 > > ---------------------------------------- > From: "Berry Mobley" <be...@gadsdenst.org> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 3:45 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements > > [...] > > >Please, unless you really know why you need to do otherwise, just > >originate your aggregates. > > +1 > > That should be unnessecary, the local prefs should already be winning as a customer vs transit/peer for equal prefix length. As an aside, generally inbound traffic steering as a reason for disaggregation is fairly frowned upon by the community at large as it effectively makes everyone else pay more in additional hardware cost for your savings. -Blake If you have provided addressing from your aggregate to your customer and they have indicated that they are multi-homing, you need to preserve their prefix-length in your outbound advertisements, or the redundant provider carries the inbound traffic. Is this also frowned on? To me, this is the multihoming tax we all pay for. Paul
