From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 20:29:54 GMT-3
At 3:44 PM -0600 11/11/02, Sam Munzani wrote:
>I don't think a /24 can be assigned by Internic to anybody anymore.
>The smallest they assign is /19. All the people who owns their old
>/24 can find Internap or other to advertise them. Can't get a new
>/24 anymore.
>
>Sam
Last time I looked, ARIN would assign one to a multihomed enterprise,
but would strongly discourage it, reminding people they don't
guarantee anyone will advertise it.
For providers, /20 remains the smallest that can directly be
allocated by the registries.
As far as being advertised, the rules vary. They vary among carriers
on whether or not you are their direct customer, and if your address
is from 192/8 (the "Swamp").
>
>
>>
>> The only provider that is different than the rest of the providers is
>> Verio, you have to announce /20. but everyOne else accept /24 as the
>> being the smallest, which make sense the reason of running BGP is
> > minimize the routing table,
> >
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dave [mailto:dave@interprise.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 3:22 PM
>> To: hkassa
>> Cc: dave; brian.albert; ccielab
>> Subject: Re: BGP & multihoming
>>
>>
>> I keep seeing people refer to this /19 as the smallest aggregate that
>> will be accepted by a provider though I have yet to meet this provider.
>> I have set up several customers with dual home full routes and they
>> announce a single /24 network or maybe a couple but very few have /19 or
>> better. The providers I have worked with that accepted the /24 include
>> Qwest, MCI, Sprint, Onvoy, and AT&T come to mind.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> Hamele Kassa wrote:
>> >
>> > Brian,
>> >
>> > You do not need to secure your own registered address/es(your network
>> has to
>> > be bigger than /19 space to qualify). The IP address/es assigned to
>> you
>> > from your providers (/24 or shorter address space) will work for you
>> as
>> > long as you are running BGP(no longer prefix than /24). However you
>> need to
>> > secure and AS from ARIN(if you are multihomed you will qualify).
>> >
>> > I hope this helps.
>> >
>> > HK
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Brian T. Albert" <brian.albert@worldnet.att.net>
>> > To: "MADMAN" <dave@interprise.com>
>> > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>> > Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 10:51 AM
>> > Subject: RE: BGP & multihoming
>> >
>> > > When you say "your own registered address/es", do you mean prefixes
>> > assigned
>> > > to you from your 2 providers or obtained from another authority?
>> What
>> > other
>> > > authority can assign you prefixes independent of you providers, and
>> what
>> > are
>> > > the requirements to obtain them?
>> > >
>> > > BA
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: MADMAN [mailto:dave@interprise.com]
>> > > Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 9:12 PM
>> > > To: Brian T. Albert
>> > > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> > > Subject: Re: BGP & multihoming
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > You don't need NAT if you have your own registered address/es. No
>> > special
>> > > config required, you simply announce your public address/es
>> > >
>> > > Dave
>> > >
>> > > "Brian T. Albert" wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > In the real world can BGP multihoming to 2 different providers be
>> > > > accomplished without NAT for the internal networks? I have found
>> some
>> > > links
>> > > > on CCO http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/BGP-PIX.htm that show
>> how to
>> > > do
>> > > > it with NAT, but is it possible without. If so, can someone
>> supply some
>> > > > config examples or good links.
>> > > >
> > > > > Thanks
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 03 2002 - 07:22:57 GMT-3