From: Hamele Kassa (hkassa@attrmc.net)
Date: Tue Nov 12 2002 - 11:10:55 GMT-3
That is Verio. Verio would not accept longer prefixes for CIDR blocks.
Rgs,
HK
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Jin
To: MADMAN ; Hamele Kassa
Cc: Brian T. Albert ; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: BGP & multihoming
I cannot remember who it was for sure, but I had a situation where I got
for
a customer of ours, to advertise a customer owned /24 to ATT and they had no
problems.
Everything went fine, and a week or two later, I got a call from the
customer saying
there is a particular web site that the executive members needed to get to
but somehow they could not since the change over to ATT.
What we found out was the fact that although ATT took in the /24 prefix and
readvertised it, there was an ISP few hops down that did not accept /24. and
the
web server that the customer needed to get to was behind that ISP.
But I cannot remember who it was, and this was back in early part of 2001.
Has anyone had any similar experience?
- Paul
MADMAN <dave@interprise.com> wrote:
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"
> To: "MADMAN"
> Cc:
> 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
> > >
> > > Brian T. Albert
> > > brian.albert@worldnet.att.net
> >
> > --
> > David Madland
> > CCIE# 2016
> > Sr. Network Engineer
> > Qwest Communications Inc.
> > 612-664-3367
> > dave@interprise.com
> >
--
David Madland
CCIE# 2016
Sr. Network Engineer
Qwest Communications
612-664-3367
"You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer." --Winston
Churchill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 03 2002 - 07:22:57 GMT-3