North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: /24 multihoming issue
On Oct 20, 2005, at 2:07 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
slipping back into the tier terminology which i was trying to avoid...Is 7018 preferring 19094 over 701 regardless of AS-PATH length?the convention is that, if 19094 is a customer of 7018, then it will always prefer it.and it was confirmed that this is the case for the prefix in questionAnd this is a good reason not to cross "tiers" of your transit providers. Either have both "transit free" or both should have transit.why? when it get up to tier-1s it will be the same, the one(s) who heard it from customers will prefer the customers. and tier-Ns should be preferring customer routes as well; see discussion here between vaf, asp, and me in about '96.
it's only a problem if you want to do inbound traffic engineering. If the tier 2 is well connected to tier 1s (for example Internap), it's typically going to get more inbound traffic than the tier 1 connection because the tier 2 is preferred as a customer in a bunch of tier 1s.