nanog mailing list archives
Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding
From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso () cisco com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 10:37:50 -0400
At 07:40 AM 7/12/96 -0600, Forrest W. Christian wrote:
However, the world never needs to see this - it's an internal routing issue and when the internal route flaps it shouldn't affect the external routes. So in summary: 1) Never flap your routes in public. What you do in your own home is your own business.
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that you're missing the point here. In most larger ISP backbones, the behavior of their IGP is indeed visible to the public, since in most instances, most of the Internet traffic relies on the stability of these interior (an esoteric term) networks. Therefore, whether interior or exterior flap is really of no relevance in this context. In smaller ISPs, where not a great deal of public traffic is transiting their (interior) backbone, granted, it is of lesser importance and visibility. - paul - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Paul Ferguson (Jul 12)
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Forrest W. Christian (Jul 12)
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Craig A. Huegen (Jul 12)
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Forrest W. Christian (Jul 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Justin W. Newton (Jul 12)
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Vadim Antonov (Jul 12)
- Re: Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Forrest W. Christian (Jul 12)