more specific routes in today reality

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001 23:30:47 +0200 (CEST)
Sabri Berisha <sabri at bit.nl> wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Jan-Ahrent-Czmok wrote:

>> "if" you have a default route. Default route if multi-homed is surely
>> bad IMHO.


> Not necessarily. If you are multi-homed for redundancy reasons and have a
> small linux box with zebra your memory would be exhausted carrying to full
> route feeds. Two single default routes are far more efficient: at home I
> have cable and dsl. I have 2 tunnels to two different routers of my
> work. Over those tunnels I announce a /28 (which is aggregated to a /19)
> and receive two default routes. My dsl is faster so that has a higher
> local pref. If that goes down, the route switches over to the cable
> tunnel.

Well. I ACK your specific implementation. We are talking not about the small 
home user (or small business user).

We are referring to ISP implementations here. In these ISP cases, when multihomed
the "default route" is not a good idea, because of the danger of routing loops.

--jan

-- 
 Jan-Ahrent Czmok        		http://www.lambda-solutions.de
 Technical Advisor ISP	    	        Hofdcker Str. 14, 65207 Wiesbaden
 Tel. +49-(0)-174-3074404