nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO?
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:12:03 +0200
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 15:09, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu> wrote:
From our side, on peering links, re-write all MED to 0 and scrubs all communities, and replace them with our own.
If you rewrite MED, you SHOULD rewrite origin (which RFC prohibits, incorrectly). I can understand rationale for rewriting MED, you don't want to cold potato, which is fair and certainly cannot be argued to be objectively wrong, since there may be a market where people will abuse your cold potato to save on their own infrastructure costs. If you rewrite MED but not origin, then you're not really accomplishing anything. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? adamv0025 (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Mark Tinka (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Saku Ytti (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Mark Tinka (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Saku Ytti (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Mark Tinka (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Saku Ytti (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Mark Tinka (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? James Jun (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Mark Tinka (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? James Jun (Jan 08)
- Re: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? Mark Tinka (Jan 08)
- RE: BGP Path Attribute Filtering, YES or NO? adamv0025 (Jan 08)