About RIPE | Contact  | Search | Sitemap    
Homepage RIPE  
RIPE Community Mail Archives
search  
     
RIPE Navigation Ends
About RIPE Maillists
Maillists Archive
Global Lists
Non Active Lists
RIPE NCC Navigation Ends
Next Section
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

RE: more specific routes in today reality

  • To: "Hallgren, Michael" < >
  • From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist KPNQwest < >
  • Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:37:17 +0200 (MEST)
  • Cc: Peter Galbavy < >
    "Vladimir A. Jakovenko" < >
    "lir-wg@localhost" < >
    "routing-wg@localhost" < >
  • Reply-to: Kurt Erik Lindqvist KPNQwest < >

> > So do I (at least in this little part of the thread, which I haven't
> > had the opportunity to follow at all length). For example, a provider-wide
> > routing (or performance, or whatever) problem would be your problem if
> > homed only to that one provider.
> 
> 
> If it is a outage and you are running BGP you will need to wait for your
> router to converge. In worst case you will be dragged into the routing
> problems. However, I agree with Randy that 90% of outages are due to
> local-tail problems. 
> 
> I agree that two links to two operators are more reliable, but the real 
> questions are if they are enough MORE reliable to justify the extra
> routes, and if so how do we implement this? And this should be a general
> solution all the way down to the residential users...
> 
> I am not conviced that having multiple upstreams for entrprises, SOHO,
> residentials or even small ISPs are worth it.

Oh, and BTW. I do think that in the long run we need to address this
(among other things) one way to the other, but I don't think that todays
routing technologies will scale for it.

- kurtis -





  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>
 

Next Section
     About RIPE | Site Map | LIR Portal | About the RIPE NCC | Contact | © RIPE Community. All rights reserved.
RIPE.NET Homepage LIR Portal RIPE Community