nanog mailing list archives
Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test
From: Danny McPherson <danny () tcb net>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 13:31:33 -0400
On 2020-04-22 12:51, Andrey Kostin wrote:
BCP38 website doesn't proclaim anybody in person to be unsafe, but if it would be possible to make such test it'd be more useful than that RPKI test. BTW, has anybody yet thought/looked into extending RPKI-RTR protocol for validation of prefixes received from peer-as to make ingress filtering more dynamic and move away prefix filters from the routers?
Do you really want those things in soft-state and not with some giant operational buffer to absorb all the brokenness that's sure to arise?
-danny
Current thread:
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test, (continued)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Matt Corallo via NANOG (Apr 21)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Rubens Kuhl (Apr 21)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Matt Corallo via NANOG (Apr 21)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Danny McPherson (Apr 22)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Warren Kumari (Apr 22)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Matt Corallo via NANOG (Apr 21)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Andrey Kostin (Apr 22)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Danny McPherson (Apr 22)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Christopher Morrow (Apr 22)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Christopher Morrow (Apr 22)
- Re: "Is BGP safe yet?" test Andrey Kostin (Apr 23)