> On Jan 23, 2024, at 00:43, William Herrin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 3:34 PM Alex Le Heux <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This is perfectly reasonable routing _if you're 3356_
>>
>> In this profit-driven world, expecting 3356 to do something that's
>> unprofitable for them just because it happens to be convenient for you is,
>> well, unreasonable.
>
> Every packet has two customers: the one sending it and the one
> receiving it. 3356 is providing a service to its customers. ALL of its
> customers. Not just 47787. Sending the packet an extra 5,000 miles
> harms every one of 3356's customers -except for- 47787.
>
> In this case, I am the customer on both ends. 3356's choice to route
> my packet via 47787 serves me poorly.
Packets don't have customers, ISPs do. And in this case you're not a customer
of the ISP making the routing decision and 3356 is doing precisely what its
customer tells it to do by adding (or not adding) specific communities to what
is announced. In other words, 3356 is doing precisely what its customer pays it
to do.
You can build a shorter backup path, deaggregate, get 53356 and 47787 to
propagate your routes differently or change your transit mix. There aren't many
other options.
Fact is that all prepending does it provide a vague hint to other networks
about what you would like them to do. And this is only one of the many things
those networks take into account when formulating their routing policies. This
is why many ASes build extensive community lists to set things like localpref
and limit route propagation in other ways. Perhaps you can try adding
53356:47787 to your announcement although it's anyone's guess how that'll
affect things.
Alex
