nanog mailing list archives
RE: Level 3 BGP Advertisements
From: "Hale, William C" <William.C.Hale () windstream com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 14:52:10 -0500
No, that's not standard practice. I do this exact thing with Level 3 and have been for many many many years. Whoever is telling you this must be green. I would recommend adding the no-export community to your more specific routes if you can so as to be a good steward of the ever growing Internet IPv4 table. ________________________________________ From: Nick Olsen [nick () flhsi com] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 2:28 PM To: nanog () nanog org Subject: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Greetings all. In practice, We've always advertised our space all the way down to /24's but also the aggregate block (the /20 or the /21). Just so there was still reachability to our network in the event that someone made the foolish mistake of filtering lets say prefixes smaller /23... Anyways, I've always thought that was standard practice. And its never been a problem. Until we brought up peering with level 3.. I noticed that while the /24's made it out to the world. The larger counterparts (2 /21's and a /20) did not. So, I start sniffing around. Find that I do indeed see the prefixes in Level 3's looking glass but they aren't handing it off to peers. So, Naturally, I land on this being some kind of prefix filtering issue and open a ticket with Level 3. They tell me this is standard practice. And If I want to see the /20 or /21's make it out to the rest of the world, I need to stop sending the /24's. Does this sound normal? Is what I'm doing (Advertising the aggregate prefix) a good rule of thumb? Any other thoughts? Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.
Current thread:
- Level 3 BGP Advertisements Nick Olsen (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Andy Davidson (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Berry Mobley (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Jon Lewis (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Randy (Aug 29)
- RE: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Hale, William C (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements William Herrin (Aug 29)
- $10k per BGP prefix? (was Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements) Jay Ashworth (Aug 29)
- Re: $10k per BGP prefix? (was Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements) Peter Kristolaitis (Aug 29)
- Re: $10k per BGP prefix? (was Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements) William Herrin (Aug 29)
- RE: Level 3 BGP Advertisements STARNES, CURTIS (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Grzegorz Janoszka (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements james machado (Aug 29)
- RE: Level 3 BGP Advertisements John van Oppen (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Matt Addison (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Blake Hudson (Aug 30)
- $10k per BGP prefix? (was Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements) Jay Ashworth (Aug 29)
- Re: Level 3 BGP Advertisements Andy Davidson (Aug 29)