On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 8:10 AM Elmar K. Bins via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote: > nanog@lists.nanog.org (Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG) wrote: > > Does the following ever happen in reality? Do you think it is strange and > > unlikely? > > The lateral (i.e., non-transit) peer of an AS is also the transit provider > > of the AS's transit provider. Example: AS A has AS B as a transit provider > > and AS C as a lateral peer, and AS C is a transit provider of AS B. > > Yes, and it's very often a mess traffic-engineering wise...
Hi Elmar, Would you mind discussing this further and offering examples of some of the traffic engineering challenges? AS A should see AS C's origin and customer routes from both AS C directly (peer) and AS B (provider). Unless AS A is playing local pref games, the peering routes have shorter AS paths and are preferred -- a sensible outcome. AS C should see AS A's routes both from AS A directly (peer) and AS B (customer). Unless AS C is playing local pref games, the peering routes have shorter AS paths and are preferred -- a sensible outcome. AS B should see AS A's routes both from AS A directly (customer) and AS B (provider). Unless AS B is playing local pref games, the customer routes have shorter AS paths and are preferred -- a sensible outcome. AS C does not see AS B's routes via its lateral peering link with AS A because on a peering link the AS only sends its origin and customer routes. Thus AS C sends AS B's packets to its customer, AS B -- a sensible outcome. Now, if one of the networks is playing local pref games, which they shouldn't be doing, then they may misroute packets the long way around the planet. But that's their fault for playing local pref games. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin b...@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/U7DECPO6SZQYSYDL7OHI3EYDE665YUXR/
