[AusNOG] Influencing Routes

[Ben]

Well it's a shorter path, but it doesn't mean it's a more direct path.

Like if I go from New Zealand via Sydney to Los Angeles it's worse than if
I go directly to Los Angeles from New Zealand.

Unless you're doing anycast on it, and using the same subnet in both locations
for services, you're probably fine just advertising to the Los Angeles provider
unless you have a better path than the users you're servicing.  If you're hosting
web sites or the like over there, then the amount of incoming traffic isn't likely
to be that high, and you can still send directly out from the US.  And even 20 msec
can make a difference with https's extra round trip times, tcp ramp up, mulitple
requests.

If you do have a better path than other people, then it's likely to only be better
for close users, so you may want to only advertise it domestically, to peering
exchanges and the like.

That said, you can get redundancy of connections and go over two providers with
two tunnels and get faster/more reliable failover if your providers have a tendency
to blackhole traffic.  (ie they advertise that they can send traffic, but then just
drop it)  Still, that's more useful from your own point of view, and doesn't have to
be advertised externally.

The other way around is generally more useful with advertising IP addresses in US
and pulling back traffic to get better transit providers.

Ben.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 06:17:36PM +1100, Daniel wrote:
> Gday Guys
> 
> Thanks for the responses thus far,
> 
> So I should keep the BGP to my LAX provider, and also establish another one
> back to AU and announce it through my Sydney provider?  So theortically it
> will be a shorter path into Sydney > GRE > LAX Router   then over the SCC
> and a heap of extra hops
> 
> Is that correct?
> 
> Daniel
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Ben
> Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2015 5:59 PM
> To: Daniel
> Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Influencing Routes
> 
> easist solution is to just run BGP on the GRE tunnel assuming you're
> advertising PI space in both locations.  advertise the /24 over the tunnel.
> 
> if the /24 is owned by the LA overseas provider you'd have to ask them for
> permission to readvertise, and for them to advertise it as a /24.
> 
> Ben.
> 
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:16:18PM +1100, Daniel wrote:
> >    Hi Guys
> > 
> >     
> > 
> >    I have a network related question that I would love some input from you
> >    on,
> > 
> >     
> > 
> >    Say ive got a network x.x.x.a/24 advertised in LA,  and I have a
> GRE/EoIP
> >    setup between my network in Sydney and LA,
> > 
> >     
> > 
> >    Is there any way I could force traffic for x.x.x.a/24 into my Sydney
> >    network and then push it overseas via said tunnel? Instead of the
> default
> >    route table listing which would take it via (For example) TPG > AAPT >
> >    Vocus Sydney > Vocus San Jose > HE > NTT > GloVine > SERVER
> > 
> >     
> > 
> >    Any questions please feel free either on or off-list
> > 
> >     
> > 
> >    Daniel
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog