nanog mailing list archives
Re: more-specifics via IX
From: Andy Davidson <andy () nosignal org>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:21:18 +0100
On 15 Oct 2007, at 13:33, John Payne wrote:
To answer the OP's question I'd be looking at manually filtering the more specifics if they are also sending the aggregates through the IX.
The customer's customer is still going to see *your* routes via the MLP, unless (without knowing what exchange) you can attach a community to the announcement that forbids the route-server from propagating it to specific networks.
Current thread:
- Re: more-specifics via IX, (continued)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Stephen Wilcox (Oct 18)
- Re: more-specifics via IX David Ulevitch (Oct 18)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Wolfgang Tremmel (Oct 15)
- Re: more-specifics via IX John Payne (Oct 15)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Che-Hoo CHENG (Oct 15)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Adrian Chadd (Oct 15)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Mike Leber (Oct 15)
- Re: more-specifics via IX John Payne (Oct 15)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Gaurab Raj Upadhaya (Oct 16)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Keegan . Holley (Oct 16)
- Re: more-specifics via IX Andy Davidson (Oct 15)