nanog mailing list archives
RE: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...
From: 水越 一郎 <ichiro () byd ocn ad jp>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 18:09:48 +0900
Enke Chen [SMTP:enkechen () cisco com] wrote on Saturday, September 13, 1997 2:29 AM Enke>For ISPs with a lot of direct (i.e., private) peers, on the public Enke>NAP routers you may want to consider not installing the routes from the Enke>private peers. This approach could reduce the damage to your private Enke>links by default-pointing attack. It may also make you less likely Enke>a target due to black-holing of certain traffic. And on the NAP router, adding the blackhole segment ( null 0 or dumb ether etc.) On cisco, null 0 is not recomended for its process switching set the default route to the blackhole segment check the packet in the segment. These packets are routed by default, so call the routing police :-) Enke>This approach is not applicable if transit service is provided at Enke>the public NAP. Peering in tunneling COULD work. ichiro () byd ocn ad jp (AS4713<-AS2521<-AS2519)
Current thread:
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...s, (continued)
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...s Nathan Stratton (Sep 12)
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...s Neil J. McRae (Sep 16)
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...s bmanning (Sep 12)
- Definition of transit Bradley Dunn (Sep 12)
- Re: Definition of transit Nathan Stratton (Sep 12)
- Re: Definition of transit Avi Freedman (Sep 12)
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...s Alex.Bligh (Sep 13)
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ... Sean M. Doran (Sep 13)
- Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ... Naiming Shen (Sep 12)