On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:00 PM, <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> wrote: > On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:23:55 -0500, William Herrin said: >> Can anyone tell me about a situation in which a route which was not >> valley free was not a result of a misconfiguration or a bad actor? For >> those who don't recall the terminology, a network path is valley free >> if it crosses exactly zero or one free peering links when traveling >> between the two endpoints. > > Assume 3 providers A B and C, where you have a single-homed customer on A and > a > single-homed customer on C, and A and C don't peer. Traffic may end up going > thorugh an A-B peering and a B-C peering. And whether A-B and B-C are a free > peering or a paid transit is a business deal, outside the scope of BGP, unless > you want to abuse communities... > > Are A and/or C "bad actors" for not peering? Jury is still out on that one.
Hi Valdis, It's that business deal I want to hear about. When A-B and B-C are free peering but the traffic goes A-B-C for some reason other than a misconfiguration or deliberate abuse. On or off list, I'd like to know about real-life use cases where folks do this on purpose. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
