Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: Global BGP - 2001-06-23 - Vendor X's statement...

  • From: Matt Levine
  • Date: Wed Jun 27 13:25:15 2001

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim,
	Agreed, so throw the bad route to the bit bucket and leave the bgp
session open, or at the very least (as others have suggested) give me
an OPTION to do that.  Bad enough we were only operating at 33%
capacity, however, if we only had transit from the 4 that were giving
us the bad route, we would have lost connectivity totally.  While it
would've been really cool to post an outage notification bragging
about our RFC compliance, and how it's everybody elses fault, I
(personally) would have preferred to stay connected to the internet
and not be losing revenue.  Perhaps I just have my priorities wrong.


Matt




- --
Matt Levine
@Home: matt@deliver3.com
@Work: matt@eldosales.com
ICQ  : 17080004
PGP  : http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6C0D04CF 

- -----Original Message-----
From: Jim Segrave [mailto:jes@nl.demon.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 5:36 AM
To: Matt Levine
Cc: 'Chance Whaley'; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Global BGP - 2001-06-23 - Vendor X's statement...


On Tue 26 Jun 2001 (15:09 -0400), Matt Levine wrote:
> 
>  
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> What I would like is for my routers to not drop 4 of our 6 transit 
> providers, RFC, standard, not standard, whatever.  We've suggested
> to  our vendor that there atleast be some option to control this,
> we are  not at the core, we are an end user.  When following the
> RFC dictates  that our routing equipment loses connectivity to the
> internet, then I  say that there is a problem.  It's really nice
> that they can say "it's  not a bug, it's a feature", but this is a
> feature I'd at the very  least have the ability to turn off.
> 
> 
> Matt

So you'd prefer to propogate the error to all of your peers, who, in
the interests of interoperability, are standards compliant? 

A bad announcement should be stopped as soon as it's discovered, not
propagated because it's inconvenient to drop the session on someone's
network. 


- -- 
Jim Segrave           jes@nl.demon.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOzoVx8p0j1NsDQTPEQKGLQCfd9wIWwhyDYgD/5ObtpOMl4IZWZAAn3R2
HsLf2EeNXCn0R6ZChnKdBPpk
=9Sc3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.