nanog mailing list archives
Re: Downstream Usage-BGP Communites
From: Michael Hallgren <m.hallgren () free fr>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 00:07:13 +0200
Le mardi 10 mai 2011 à 17:52 -0400, Nick Olsen a écrit :
Greetings NANOG, Was hoping to gain some insight into common practice with using BGP Communities downstream. For instance: We peer with AS100 (example) AS100 peers with TW Telecom (AS4323). Since I happen to know that AS100 doesn't sanitize the communities I send with my routes. I can take advantage of TW Telecom's BGP communities for traffic engineering. Such as 4323:666 (Keep in TWTC Backbone). Would this be something that is generally frowned upon? Still under the assumption that the communities aren't scrubbed off my routes. Could I do this with other AS's beyond TW Telecom? Such as TW's peering with Global Crossing (AS3549)?
It's quite common, in my experience, that we remove (or at least filter; usually looking at geo-origin ones only) BGP community values from peers and filter them (modulo some set of agreed ones) from customers. In other words, don't generally expect transitivity. mh
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
Current thread:
- Downstream Usage-BGP Communites Nick Olsen (May 10)
- Re: Downstream Usage-BGP Communites Michael Hallgren (May 10)
- Re: Downstream Usage-BGP Communites Richard A Steenbergen (May 10)
- Re: Downstream Usage-BGP Communites Justin M. Streiner (May 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Downstream Usage-BGP Communites Nick Olsen (May 10)
- Re: Downstream Usage-BGP Communites Richard A Steenbergen (May 10)