[dns-operations] glitch on [ip6|in-addr].arpa?

Warren Kumari warren at kumari.net
Thu Oct 10 20:01:08 UTC 2019

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 4:59 PM Frank Louwers <frank at tembo.be> wrote:
> Hi Warren,
> The lack of peering with a network doesn't prevent my accessing them,
> it just means that my packets take a sub-optimal[0] route.
> The above doesn't look like that at all, it looks like $something else
> (like dropped fragments), which is completely different to not
> peering[1].
> I feel like I haven't had my morning coffee, and am missing something
> wildly obvious here -- please, what it is?
> W
> [0]: Well, sub-optimal in terms of number of AS's, not necessarily in
> terms of congestion, latency, reliability, geography, etc.
> You don't peer with HE, but you buy transit from a company that does peer with HE.
> Neither Cogent or HE buy transit from anybody else. They only peer and have customers. They don't buy "fallback" traffic.

Ohhhhhhhhh... yes. As I said, I *felt* like I was missing something
obvious. That was it.... and now I feel like an idiot :-P


> Now if Cogent refuses to peer with HE (or the other way around), and they both don't buy traffic from anybody else, they can't reach each other...
> Frank
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations

I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.

More information about the dns-operations mailing list