RE: Thoughts on BGP and Shared Hosting Environments

["Daniel Golding" <dgolding () sockeye com>]

I'm guessing that the problem wasn't users getting to the sites. It was the
data getting back...

Normally, when folks advertise space less then RIR guidelines, the also
advertise the larger aggregate, to ensure that this sort of thing doesn't
happen due to filtering. Try advertising the /21s out each link, then the
aggregate out both links. As well. You should have most traffic going to the
more specifics, with some traffic, from route filteded networks using the
aggregates. The latter traffic will route via the more specifics, when it
reaches a network that knows them. In the worst case, this is slightly
suboptimal routing for those from route-filtering networks.

- Daniel Golding

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
Brian Whalen
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 3:33 PM
To: Christopher J. Wolff
Cc: nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: Thoughts on BGP and Shared Hosting Environments



It would be interesting to know what is happening to traffic in the broken
2x/21 setup.  Did the various looking glasses see it correctly?  Is it out
of traditional class a space, or that new block just assigned to apnic?

Brian "Sonic" Whalen
Success = Preparation + Opportunity


On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Christopher J. Wolff wrote:

> Had an interesting situation yesterday.
>
> Received a new /20 allocation.
> Split it into /19's and advertised it to two separate backbones via two
> separate routers.
>
> Users on the new /19's could get to about 75% of the available web hosts
on
> the internet.
>
> I removed the /19's and advertised the entire /20 out of both servers,
> problem resolved.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Also, what are the groups opinions on web hosting customers who want to
> install custom ASP and COM components on a shared Windows 2000/IIS hosting
> server?  I'm having a debate with a sales dude over this issue.
>
> My opinion is that it potentially destabilizes all of the virtual hosts on
> that system.  When I hear "Can you install just a couple of ASP or COM
> components on my domain" my mind immediately goes to putting this customer
> in their own dedicated colo server.  I don't think its right to jeopardize
> several hundred virtual domains because one $19.99/month customer wants to
> load up a special .dll.  But that's just my rant, market conditions can
> dictate otherwise.
>
> Regards,
> Christopher J. Wolff, VP, CIO
> Broadband Laboratories, Inc.
> http://www.bblabs.com
> email:chris () bblabs com
> phone:520.622.4338 x234