nanog mailing list archives
RE: Clue's for Clue-less
From: "Martin, Christian" <CMartin () mercury balink com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:49:44 -0500
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. Signed, 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... -Chris
Current thread:
- Clue's for Clue-less Richard Irving (Oct 26)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Clue's for Clue-less Martin, Christian (Oct 26)
- Re: Clue's for Clue-less Richard Irving (Oct 26)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Clue's for Clue-less Richard Irving (Oct 27)
- Re: Clue's for Clue-less Richard Irving (Oct 26)
- Re: Clue's for Clue-less Richard Irving (Oct 26)
- Re: Clue's for Clue-less Jim Jagielski (Oct 27)