nanog mailing list archives
RE: AS path question.
From: "George Bonser" <gbonser () seven com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:52:55 -0800
it very hard to believe anyone legitimately needs an as-path length anywhere near that long". Worst case, someone is silly with their number of prepends, we don't see their route. I can't say how long I've been doing this...it predates our rancid setup, which means >6 years. Though it's caused numerous dropped routes, it hasn't generated a single complaint. In your opinion, is filtering of BGP routes based on prefix length
also
a sign of ignorance? Everyone should just be letting all the crap through?
There is the argument that anyone with that many prepends doesn't really want you to see that route anyway and if anything changed on their end where they really wanted people to see the route and use it, they would reduce the prepends.
Current thread:
- Re: AS path question., (continued)
- Re: AS path question. John Osmon (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Joe Provo (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Scott Weeks (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Jack Bates (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Scott Weeks (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Jack Bates (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Nick Hilliard (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Nick Hilliard (Nov 17)
- RE: AS path question. Rettke, Brian (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Jon Lewis (Nov 10)
- RE: AS path question. George Bonser (Nov 10)
- Re: AS path question. Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 11)
- Re: AS path question. Jon Lewis (Nov 11)
- Re: AS path question. Jack Bates (Nov 11)