On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 09:11:00PM -0600, David Farmer wrote:
> What every you did its announcing the new next-hop addresses now.
> Maybe you were having a similar issue to what the CDW/Berbee guys
> were. I apologize, and hopefully everyone's issues are as simple.
...
There is an oddity in the route servers, in such that, even though
they are configured to present the router-ID in the new session as the
new IP, that they have been seen to be using the old IP address to
connect to the remote host for the new session.
It could be this sort of oddness that triggers some sides to be
announcing out the old next-hop for their blocks. This is what I
accounted for on one announcement previously.
Digging into the route tables on the route servers, only one AS isn't
dual announcing, and since you already named it, we could do the push
on them. AS 15011. Although they did respond to me privately a couple
weeks ago that they know they need to get this done ASAP.
The others that are showing up with 69.147.218/24 next-hops are all
dual-announcing as far as I can tell, and a few blocks just happen to
have choosen the announcement with the old-next hop in there
(especially on the 2nd RR), but all others are dual-announcing.
It is almost to the point where we should clean up the route servers.
We are sitting pretty good for the renumbering project for the final
stretch. I think everybody but AS15011 is ready to go and drop the old
block, although the schedule allows that to have happened on the 1st
of the month already.
--
Doug McIntyre <[log in to unmask]>
-- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS --
Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
