I'm afraid this is turning into one of those operational realities
where your best course of action is hiring a competent consultant to
take you through the planning and implementation.
Some of the issues that will need to be examined include:
1. Are you, the other ISP, both, or neither designated by RIPE NCC as
Local Internet Registries? At least one LIR will have to work with
the RIPE NCC.
2. I'm troubled by your repeated use of the term "class", which has no
place in discussions of Internet routing, and the term "owned" with
relation to them. The terms "prefixes" and "allocation" (the latter
versus "assignment") MUST be understood here. If all the ISPs
involved
don't understand them fully, they can very well produce designs in
which RIPE NCC won't allocate more address space in the future.
3. There's no discussion of aggregation requirements and the need of
a multihoming policy that advertises some more-specifics.
4. It's unclear if a link failure should cause the complete shift of
advertised prefixes. Would normal BGP suffice, or does one ISP
need to use the Cisco conditional advertisement feature?
5. The coordination can't just be with RIPE or the relevant LIR; it has
to involve the other ISP as well. If both ISPs don't agree to
advertise
pieces of each others' address spaces, and/or don't register policies
in the RIPE NCC routing registry that reflects this, higher-level
providers that generate filters from the routing registry may very
well refuse some of your routes, the customer's routes, etc.
You'll want to read all relevant RIPE NCC documents on multihoming
and AS allocation policy. They do have classes that can help in part
of this. Consider attending the RIPE meeting in Amsterdam later this
month and meeting some of the key people -- you might get enough help
informally to be OK.
>Thx for your fast reply
>Actually this customer has two links, one to me and the second to another
>ISP. Also he uses some classes owned by me and other classes owned by the
>other provider.
>The case is he needs to BGP peer with me and with the other provider and to
>advertise the whole classes (owned by me and the other provider) to me and
>the other provider.
>In case one of the links failed he will still get his all classes from the
>other provider
>So can u please advise what to do with Ripe to achieve this?
>
>Thanks and best regards
>_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
>Ismail M Saeed
>Senior Network Engineer
>GEGA NET
>Tel. +202-4149771 ext.125
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
>To:
>Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 8:20 PM
>Subject: Re: BGP CASE [7:30620]
>
>
>> >We are ISP with AS advertised in Ripe, and we have number of class C .
A
>> >client want to use some class C of mine and he wants to BGP peer with me
>and
>> >advertise this classes to me. The client has its own registered AS in
>Ripe.
>> >How can we do that?
>> >
>> >Thanks and best regards
>> >
>>
>> A good first start would be to examine your customer's and your
>> routing policies as recorded in the RIPE routing registry. The
>> customer presumably already advertises its prefixes to other AS, and
>> it needs to do the same to you.
>>
>> Assuming the customer's goal is to gain additional availability, you
>> certainly need to readvertise those prefixes to your upstreams. If
>> you have other customers that default to you, those connections need
>> no changes.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=30634&t=30620
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
