Consistent routing policy?

• Subject: Consistent routing policy?
• From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
• Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:43:37 +0200
• In-reply-to: <CA[email protected]>
• References: <CA[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CA+GrwCOpEs[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CA[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CA[email protected]>

On 16/Sep/19 21:55, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote:

>
>
> The point is that you must expect inbound traffic to any prefix you
> advertise to the outside world, even a more specific announcement is
> also being advertised.  There are legitimate circumstances where an
> ISP would prefer the super-block.

It's not about the business reasons for wanting it, it's about what the
router does if it's presented with the options.

Like I said before, you can do things to your network to prevent your
router from installing a longer prefix. But if you do not, the longer
prefix will always be installed and used, first.

Mark.

• References:
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: benlogan at myriverstreet.net (Ben Logan)
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: benlogan at myriverstreet.net (Ben Logan)
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: ximaera at gmail.com (Töma Gavrichenkov)
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
  • Consistent routing policy?
    • From: ximaera at gmail.com (Töma Gavrichenkov)

• Prev by Date: Consistent routing policy?
• Next by Date: Cogent sales reps who actually respond
• Previous by thread: Consistent routing policy?
• Next by thread: Consistent routing policy?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread