more specific routes in today reality
Vladimir A. Jakovenko vovik at lucky.net
Tue Oct 9 15:14:39 CEST 2001
On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 01:44:12PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: >Hi, > >On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 01:22:43PM +0200, Sascha E. Pollok wrote: >> >> "- If PI is requested for multi-homing please explain why the second >> >> provider cannot route PA space as a more specific route (with the >> >> PA block holder adding a more specific route too)." >> > >> >This doesn't specify who is originating the BGP prefix. Both providers >> >have to *route* it, of course. >> >> We got this reply to a PI-space request for a customer that does >> not have his own ASN therefore ISPs would need to originate the >> route. Don't you think that this implies originating the prefix >> from two different ASes? (would appear when doing "sh ip bgp incons"). > >Yes. But this would not be any different from getting a PI space and >announcing it inconsistently, that is, originating it from both ISPs. > >Which is not a good practice in any case - I agree on that. What is a good practice for small company who needs: 1. Small ammount of ip addresses (about /24) 2. Multihoming ? -- Regards, Vladimir.
[ lir-wg Archives ]