From: Paul G. Donner (no email)
Date: Mon Apr 02 2001 - 20:57:44 EDT
it also works the other way around. letting clueless networks manage
multihoming with BGP
can be a bad thing for the internet in general, especially if the upstreams
do not enforce some
*discipline* on their customers in these cases. this can be as detrimental
to the customer as
having lousy upstream service.
At 03:37 PM 4/2/2001 -0700, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> > So, please explain to me how not being multi-homed is anything
> other than a
> > bad-thing and high-risk? No, I am not including colo, because it is
> assumed
> > that you know what their arrangements are before you "buy".
> Reputable colos
> > are multi-homed, in spades.
>
>You say "responsible cab drivers must have not one, but two taxicabs, in
>order to provide service in the event of a failure. Therefore, I bought
>one from Fisher-Price, and one from Hot Wheels, and I'm astounded to find
>that neither provides me with the luxury which I expected." I think
>Patrik may have been suggesting that if you had a Checker, you might not
>need to worry quite so much about redundancy.
>
> -Bill
|
|
|