[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

best practice for advertising peering fabric routes

Subject: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
From: morrowc.lists at gmail.com (Christopher Morrow)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:22:20 -0500
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Niels Bakker <niels=nanog at bakker.net> wrote:
> * nanog at shankland.org (Jim Shankland) [Wed 15 Jan 2014, 18:04 CET]:
>
>> So ... RFC1918 addresses for the IXP fabric, then?
>>
>> (Half kidding, but still ....)
>
>
> They need to be globally unique.

do they? :)

also... there is/was an exchange in south america (columbia maybe?
it's been a while since I saw this in configs) that used
192.168.0.0/16 space for their exchange.

References:
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: elouie at yahoo.com (Eric A Louie)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: patrick at ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: patrick at ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: nanog at shankland.org (Jim Shankland)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: niels=nanog at bakker.net (Niels Bakker)

Prev by Date: gmail.com - 550 error for ipv6/PTR ?
Next by Date: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Previous by thread: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Next by thread: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread