On Thursday 20 April 2006 15:48, Pekka Savola wrote:
Hi,
I don't support PI space to end-sites. We have to get rid of the notion that a random end-site has any business whatsoever in mucking with the global routing tables, either by making it much larger than need be or by polluting it with needless dynamicity.
Example of the latter: deploying inbound traffic engineering adjustment solutions which result in thousands of daily flaps in the advertisements, as shown by Huston's analysis.
We have way too much trouble with clueless ISPs to also add (or continue to add) end-sites to the mix...
Sorry I can't agree with you there. Organizations that really need this are generally very professional (ok not always but they they can hire a professional for them) and many times much larger than some ISPs. I think it is unfair to say that a non-ISP business is per definition not able to handle routing networks. I have just seen the 2nd fully uncordinated, but promissed to be smooth, transition of network connectivity by a large ISP in NL so I guess we all make mistakes. Could we leave emotions and kingdoms out of the discussion and focus on the real issue of a large network that happens not to be an ISP that needs solid connectivity to the net and has a large world-wide internal network managed by professionals.... Best regards, Marc -- -- This mail is personal -- All statements in this mail are made from my own personal perspective and do not necessarily reflect my employer's opinions or policies.