I'm seeing this announced at CIXP
Collector: CIXP
Prefix: 128.0.0.0/2
Last update time: 2007-04-27 07:36:30Z
Peer: 192.65.185.140
Origin: 29222
My question is, why am I not seeing more issues because of the announcement? Is it just not propagating out of the exchange? It's been announced for a few days and only seems to appear at the exchange.
jas
Collector: CIXP
Prefix: 128.0.0.0/2
Last update time: 2007-04-27 07:36:30Z
Peer: 192.65.185.140
Origin: 29222My question is, why am I not seeing more issues because of the
announcement?
because everyone with enough clue to watch what they receive has filters in
place to prevent their hearing it?
randy
Collector: CIXP
Prefix: 128.0.0.0/2
oh. any prefix of use is longer and hence is preferred
randy
And even if they didn't, what important IP space in that /2 is not covered by more specifics?
It's so 'non-specific', all it's going to catch is traffic for destinations for which there is no route in the global table. i.e. it's likely nobody would notice it (nothing broken) unless looking for it.
The Ghost of Peter nee Sprint, 1995 has returned.
--bill
>I'm seeing this announced at CIXP
>
>Collector: CIXP
>Prefix: 128.0.0.0/2
>Last update time: 2007-04-27 07:36:30Z
>Peer: 192.65.185.140
>Origin: 29222
>
>My question is, why am I not seeing more issues because of the
>announcement?
Other than gabage hijacking, potential blackholing, or stage 2 of
redirecting traffic [where stage 1 would require a total outage
for the real traffic], what "more issues" would you expect?
> Is it just not propagating out of the exchange? It's been
>announced for a few days and only seems to appear at the exchange.
Members at that exchange would be able to answer: how are they
seeing it, is it NO-EXPORT tagged, etc.
It's so 'non-specific', all it's going to catch is traffic for
destinations for which there is no route in the global table. i.e. it's
likely nobody would notice it (nothing broken) unless looking for it.
To randy's point, folks who are caring enough to filter often have
ceiling filters to prevent utter silliness. The interesting experiement
would be who would propagate it if there was an IRR entry for it.
route-views.oregon-ix.net>sho ip bgp 128.0.0.0/2
% Network not in table
route-views.oregon-ix.net>
...so it is being stepped on appropriately by at least
AS29222:AS-TRANSIT.
Cheers,
Joe
Right. Think of it as the world's largest packet telescope.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
nah, that'd be 0/0 
A whole lot if any of those more specific were withdrawn and
the /2 were to pick up for them...
-danny
BGP routing table entry for 2.0.0.0/24, version 686581
Paths: (19 available, best #17, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Not advertised to any peer
7018 1299 34211 41856 41856, (received-only)
12.0.1.63 from 12.0.1.63 (12.0.1.63)
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external
Community: 7018:5000
what about these fun things?