On Thu, 15 Jul 2010, Bill Bogstad wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Robert Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Bill Bogstad wrote:
While the above is technically correct, in his circumstance BGP is not
an option. To do BGP you TYPICALLY need to
own your IP address space in order to be able to advertise them
successfully. He's talking about how many addresses his provider is
going to give him so he doesn't have such addresses.
Not really. You can get a chunk of IP space from your main provider, and
advertise a route to it through your backup provider. This is becoming more
common as IPv4 space is becoming a more expensive commodity.
In the past, providers would refuse to do this. Maybe it's changed.
It's preety much become neccessary in these days where there's lots of
routes and not enough IP space. In the case I mention, the primary ISP
doesn't have to announce a specific route; it's aggregated in with the
rest of their IP space. Only the secondary ISP does, so one route
announcement is saved. I've heard cases where the customer is allowed to
take the IP space allocated to them by the ISP even when they stop being a
customer. At this point, there is no longer any saving of routes, so I can
only see this being done in unusual circumstances. I imagine that the
customer would still have to pay some fee to their original ISP for the IP
space.
In any case, the customer is going to need their own ASN (Autonomous
System Number). These were originally 16 bits but they're running out of
ASNs so there is an expansion to 32 bits underway. The charge from ARIN is
$500 and then $50 per year.
What's really interesting is how well BGP can work even when there is an
accident and two networks accidently use the same ASN. The result is that
the networks in question can't talk to each other, but everyone else can
talk to either of them. If the networks are small and don't have any
interaction, this can go unnoticed for some time. It could also be done on
purpose, with two networks sharing the same ASN, and having a private
route between each of their networks. I thought I was going to have to do
this for a while (because of an ASN shortage), but ended up not having to
(got another ASN).
Second, the address space he's talking about is so small that even if
he does get addresses and providers who will do BGP, no one else will
pay attention to his advertisements anyway.
Yes, this is true, you generally need a /24 (a.k.a. class C, 255 IP
addresses) in order to be sure your route is propagated across the whole
net. But I am a bit unusure of this, there may be ways around this problem.
Each advertisement takes
up expensive memory in core Internet routers and the larger network
providers aren't going to spend lots of money so he can have redundant
network providers. Don't go there.
Well yes it does take up more memory, but that doesn't mean the route won't
propagate through BGP. I still regularly get route announcements for very
small allocations (as small as a single host!), and people won't announce or
propagate such routes if they didn't have value.
If you are "very important" networks will allow smaller allocations
through. I think some of the DNS root servers are using "anycast" and
small BGP announcements for redundancy purposes.
Anycast! Yes I hadn't thought of that..it makes sense. Well, that's the
first new thing I've learned today.
I still think this is likely to be a non-starter for someone in the
original poster's situation.
However, if he wants to pursue it; he could go look at the archives
for the NANOG mailing list for what is typical practices on BGP
announcements.
Indeed. Like I said, we've wandered off the original topic.
-Bob
_______________________________________________
bblisa mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
