Re: [isp-bgp] IX core - public or private ASN?

[Arnold Nipper <arnold@...>]

On 01.04.2006 05:53 Tom Sanders wrote

> Hmm .. I dont think its so simple. If i am peering up with an IX then
> i need to expose all my policies right? Or else how do i get the
> routes?
>
> A lot of clients may not be willing to expose all of their policies.
> But if they dont do that, then may get some odd routes.
>
> I would love the idea of peering up with IL3 Xes if we can do away
> with this bit, and if they can come out with a way with which i dont
> need to expose all my routing policies.
Imho it's really trivial to see what your peering policies are. So why 
do you want to hide them?



Arnold

> On 24/03/06, Dan Farrell <danno@...> wrote:
> > I would agree completely with the route server idea... gives much more
> > scalability while centralizing most guts of your BGP configuration... if
> > we're thinking of the same method of implementation ;)
> >
> > I'm in the process of converting to route servers now in our network...
> >
> > Dan Farrell
> > Applied Innovations
> > danno@...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pete Templin [mailto:petelists@...]
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:33 AM
> > To: isp-bgp@isp-bgp.com
> > Subject: Re: [isp-bgp] IX core - public or private ASN?
> >
> > Aliaga, Luis Carlos - (Per) wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm Luis form Peru and i'm writing to the list regarding the
> > > implementation of a new arquitecture for the Peruvian IX. We're going
> > to
> > > implement a two-router core running iBGP peering with each of the
> > ISP's
> > > routers (e-bgp), so we are discussing the advantajes and disadvantages
> > > of using a private or public ASN for the IX's core.
> >
> > What's the topology?  If it's switched, you may want to consider route
> > servers rather than routers, as many of the route server software tools
> > allow the ability to hide their own AS, in which case private or public
> > ASN won't make much difference.  If it's routed, I'd lean toward public
> > ASN since it'll be visible in the AS path, or consider whether it'd be
> > better to simply route between the subnets and let the participants peer
> >
> > with each other.  Adding to the AS path length may cause networks to
> > de-prefer your IX without copious tuning.
> >
> > pt
> >
> > _______________
> > ______________


> > To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
> > Jupitermedia Corp.
> > Attn: Discussion List Management
> > 475 Park Avenue South
> > New York, NY 10016
> >
> > Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
> >
> > Copyright 2005 Jupitermedia Corporation All Rights Reserved.



> > To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
> > Jupitermedia Corp.
> > Attn: Discussion List Management
> > 475 Park Avenue South
> > New York, NY 10016
> >
> > Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
> >
> > Copyright 2005 Jupitermedia Corporation All Rights Reserved.
>
>
> --
> Toms.



> To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
> Jupitermedia Corp.
> Attn: Discussion List Management
> 475 Park Avenue South
> New York, NY 10016
>
> Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
>
> Copyright 2005 Jupitermedia Corporation All Rights Reserved.

--
Arnold Nipper / nIPper consulting, Sandhausen, Germany
email: arnold@nipper.de       phone: +49 6224 9259 299
mobile: +49 172 2650958         fax: +49 6224 9259 333





To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.

Copyright 2005 Jupitermedia Corporation All Rights Reserved.