6 Mar
2012
6 Mar
'12
8:41 p.m.
On 3/6/12 12:30 PM, Brian Kantor wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 12:01:46PM -0800, Assi Friedman wrote:
Shouldn't it be up to the router user to decide if they want to do directly routed or tunneled subnets? Assi kk7kx
There's the issue of BGP-announcing little pieces of net 44. Right now UCSD is announcing the whole thing.
It would be simpler to administer if you segmented it and announced only the range for which you had routes, and one for which you didn't offer them. Users could decide whether they wanted UCSD to announce a route for them, or not. But is there anything bad about multiple BGP announcements for the same host? Isn't that conceptually the same as multi-homing?
-- David WA6NMF