more specific routes in today reality

Hi,

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 12:23:55PM +0100, Hallgren, Michael wrote:
> > > This however, does not mean though that multiple uplinks to 
> > more than one
> > > provider gives you more security than mulitple uplinks to one.
> > 
> > I completely disagree with you.
> 
> 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.

Yes.  But if one ISP really messes up his routing, he can still blackhole
his multi-homed customers as well (like "redistribute IGP into BGP,
announce that as more-specifics into the global table and get all the
traffic for the netblock in question").

On the other hand: how many "provider wide routing outages" have you
seen recently in business provider networks (that haven't been fixed
more quickly than a customer would have needed to figure out what's
going on and disconnect one upstream to get rid of those problems)?

Be realistic about what outage scenarios you're planning for.

I still think that for most outages these days, it's sufficient to get
multiple uplinks to the same ISP (maybe to different POPs).  This will
also take care of "the local router at the customer falls down due to
BGP table growth and out of memory" (or other BGP related problems), 
which IS something that a strategy for maximum reliability has to take
into account.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299