-----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



Reply via email to