I recently made a request to get a cable modem connection at my home. I
went for one of those $29.95 for three month specials in case I run afoul of
some rules prohibiting what I am going to do. I already have a multi-T1
connection with a Class C block and BGP running on my Cisco 3640 router,
spam was a lousy name...
-Original Message-
From: spam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:44 AM
To: 'nanog@merit.edu'
Subject: FW: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound routing through
particular routes
I recently made a request to get a cable modem
routes
spam was a lousy name...
-Original Message-
From: spam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:44 AM
To: 'nanog@merit.edu'
Subject: FW: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound routing through
particular routes
I recently made a request to get
: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound routing through
particular routes
spam was a lousy name...
-Original Message-
From: spam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:44 AM
To: 'nanog@merit.edu'
Subject: FW: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound
-Original Message-
From: Mike Damm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 12:22 PM
To: spam
Subject: Re: FW: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound routing through
particular routes
Let me see if I understand what you are saying...
You have a real network with routers, T1
W. Ray; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound routing through
particular routes
What's the netblock and ASN you already have?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Edward W. Ray
Sent: Wednesday, November 02
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:35:07PM -0600, John Dupuy wrote:
There is nothing about a cable modem that would normally prevent a
BGP session. Nor do all the intermediate routers need to support BGP
(multi-hop BGP). However, direct connections are preferred.
Your _real_ challenge is
RAS,
I have to admit that I'm guilty of using the phrase class C more or less
interchangably with /24 - I suspect a lot of us still do that...
On 11/2/05 2:22 PM, Richard A Steenbergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:35:07PM -0600, John Dupuy wrote:
There is nothing
I have to admit that I'm guilty of using the phrase class C
more or less interchangably with /24 - I suspect a lot of us
still do that...
well, now you can do it for /64s
and class B can be /48s (or is it /56s?)
and class A can be /32s
we have all been here before -- csny
except i guess
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:21:15PM -0800, Joe McGuckin wrote:
RAS,
I have to admit that I'm guilty of using the phrase class C more or less
interchangably with /24 - I suspect a lot of us still do that...
Well, on behalf of the entire networking community, I hereby ask you to
stop it. :)
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
It's just a bad habit, and while you may know exactly what it means and
doesn't mean, it does nothing but confuse new people about how and why
classless routing works. It is absolutely absurd that so many people still
keep them confused, then
11 matches
Mail list logo
