nanog mailing list archives
Re: T3 or not to T3
From: "Dorian R. Kim" <dorian () cic net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 02:22:06 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 22 Jul 1996, Avi Freedman wrote:
I hear that Sprint, one of the few large providers (that imposes filters on customer BGP sessions) that still bases customer peering filters on as-path filters rather than on a per-session route filter list either manually constructed or built automagically from databases, is considering going or is going to go to route filtering its customer sessions rather than as-path filtering. Now, I'm talking here about the BGP sessions,
This makes sense is this the "Right Way" to do things, IMO. However, this requires a significant degree of router configuration automation, and some sort a reliable database to do in a large scale. But then again, I'm sure Sprint has the resources to handle this type of a challenge. -dorian - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: T3 or not to T3, (continued)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Alec H. Peterson (Jul 23)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Bill Manning (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Stephen Stuart (Jul 22)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Dorian R. Kim (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Matthew Petach (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Dorian R. Kim (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Chris Caputo (Jul 22)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Stan Barber (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Dean Gaudet (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Avi Freedman (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Dorian R. Kim (Jul 21)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Jim Van Baalen (Jul 22)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Avi Freedman (Jul 22)
- Re: T3 or not to T3 Dean Gaudet (Jul 21)