[c-nsp] Problems with peers that don't have full routing tables

[Joe Provo]

On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 03:00:45PM -0400, Bob Tinkelman wrote:
> I'd like some advice regarding a problem we ran into earlier
> this week.  It occured on our peering link with Yahoo, but I
> think it could happen with any peer which does not keep a
> full routing table.

"Full routing table" is as subjective and meaningless as "full 
usenet feed".

[snip]
> Our quick work-around was to get our customer to bgp-
> announce the /24 to both their upstreams.  This cleared
> the problem but isn't giving them the inbound routing
> policy they wanted.

There are more routing policies across the globe than you
or I can think of, and they all change.  Assuming anything
about any of them is folly.  Deaggregation-based  "load 
balancing" assumes much about remote topologies, and can
only ever be guarenteed affective as far as the customer-
provider relationship extends.  As such, NO-EXPORT (or
for those who support is, NO-PEER) tagged deaggregates
are a useful tool.  Otherwise,spewing deaggregates just
violates being conservative in what you send.

-- 
             RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE