Richard Irving Wrote:
To "You Know Who You Are":
Since some of the filtering policies on the core *seem* to
not benefit the Internet as a whole... (or is that Hole ?
May I suggest one that does:
neighbor WWW.XXX.YYY.ZZZ maximum-prefix XXXXX
It has a way of dropping "clue-nots"..... When
they demonstrate said title.....
Your clueful attention appreciated.
One *URKED* Core Operator.
What if it has a way of dropping big blocks? From what I've seen n
sniffer traces, it depends on how the routes are stored in the BGP table
that determines how they are advertised. This may have the effect of
sinking large, valid netblocks. Unless you've seen otherwise...
No proof one way, or the other, Martin....
The only neighbors I lost on this one, dumped something
they shouldn't..... If someone de-aggregates a /16,
it fires off alarms.... Although these may be valid advertisements,
We have opted for the "safe, rather than sorry" perspective.
(Besides, the alarms *assure* prompt attention)
Running the internet requires a certain degree of Altruism.
One should set policies that *protect* the core, rather than one's
Doing other than this will result in a global internet
that is not reliable...And we all lose.
"The good of the many, outweigh the desires of the few"
(No matter *how* expensive a tie they wear
PS: 11.2.xx and higher have this command...
Martin, Christian wrote:
Sharif Torpis wrote:
this must be an 11.2 thing?
Have you ever met an 11.1.xx technician *not*
wearing synthetics to test it ?