Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-17 Thread Jason Canady
ons > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > - Original Message - > > From: "Mike Poublon" <mpoub...@secantnet.net> > To: "rar" <r...@syssrc.com>, nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Thursday, October

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-17 Thread Mike Hammett
://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Poublon" <mpoub...@secantnet.net> To: "rar" <r...@syssrc.com>, nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 2:04:29 PM Subject: Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection? I

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-17 Thread Kraig Beahn
Steering clear of the failure domain conversation, if its of any benefit - we can at least confirm that Comcast is willing to establish /29's for multiple BGP connections at 56 Marietta/ATL. These circuits are written on true wholesale/transit IP service contracts, which may be the difference.

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-14 Thread Bill Blackford
It comes down to sizing your failure domain. Any single upstream Transit alone means the failure domain is the whole site (making assumptions about your topology). As mentioned earlier, any single point of failure doesn't reduce your failure footprint and gives little in terms of redundancy. Now

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-14 Thread Paul S.
+1, could not have said it better. On 10/15/2016 01:47 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote: In a message written on Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:48:18PM +, rar wrote: The goal is to keep the single BGP router from being a single point of failure. I don't really understand the failure analysis / uptime

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-14 Thread Leo Bicknell
In a message written on Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:48:18PM +, rar wrote: > The goal is to keep the single BGP router from being a single point of > failure. I don't really understand the failure analysis / uptime calculation. There is one router on the Comcast side, which is a single point of

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-13 Thread Ryan, Spencer
works.com/> From: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> on behalf of Jörg Kost <j...@ip-clear.de> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 3:59:29 PM To: rar Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection? On 13 Oct 2016, at 19:48, rar wrote: &

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-13 Thread Jörg Kost
On 13 Oct 2016, at 19:48, rar wrote: Comcast said they could not support two separate BGP peering sessions on the same circuit. Does anyone have any counter examples? We used to have this setup with Comcast 5+ years ago, but now they say they can't support it. So how do they connect

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-13 Thread Dovid Bender
Whenever we set up a bgp peer we do that to minimize downtime when doing maint. It's hit or miss. HE required a second physicall connection NTT was more than accommodating. On Oct 13, 2016 15:06, "Mike Poublon" wrote: > I started a thread around the same topic back on

Re: Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-13 Thread Mike Poublon
I started a thread around the same topic back on 10/16 of 2014. A Comcast engineer (who ultimately spoke to the national product manager) came back after discussing and said the same thing "We don't support that". I got a slightly longer explanation of:

Two BGP peering sessions on single Comcast Fiber Connection?

2016-10-13 Thread rar
After a many month wait, we were ready to turn up our BGP peering sessions on a new Comcast fiber connection. With our other providers (Level 3 and Verizon) we have edge routers that directly connect between the provider's on premise connection and our primary and a backup core routers. Each