[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Failover for a multihomed site with unreachable ISP



On donderdag, maa 27, 2003, at 09:49 Europe/Amsterdam, Christian Schild wrote:

Maybe a better solution would be a backup organization that announces
the /32 if it disappears and tunnels the packets to the customers over
the secondary ISPs.

I'm not sure if I got your point here. Are you suggesting that another ISP
has to take over all the traffic for the disconnected ISP? I hardly believe
this will ever happen in the real world :)
It could. An ISP could set up a related, but independent backup network. Since this network would only have to peer or buy transit in a couple of locations and maintain a bunch of tunnels, this wouldn't be too costly.

If the routers must be able to handle the full set of unaggregated
prefixes anyway, why bother aggregating?

Well, a large routing table is only a memory/msg-size problem.
Memory scales linear so that's not the biggest problem. Processing scales worse than linear so in the end that will be the downfall of huge routing tables.


A large
forwarding table also slows down the forwarding process. With automatic
aggregation at least the latter is solved.
This isn't a protocol issue. Vendors can implement this today, but they choose not to.