nanog mailing list archives

Re: RFC 1771, further thoughts


From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: 26 Jun 2001 20:09:27 -0700


On Tue, 26 June 2001, lucifer () lightbearer com wrote:
In an attempt to return to an argument, rather than simple contradiction
(ok, ok, it's far more polite and reasonable so far than that would imply,
but I couldn't miss the cheap shot; apologies hereby tendered), perhaps we
should consider *what* the RFC should say, if it should be changed? Going
to the WG with a proposal in hand and a rationale to support it would seem
to be the best path.

One problem which makes the current practice worse in practice is the
cycling of the BGP session.  Once you decide a BGP peer is "insane" why
start a fresh BGP session with the same peer, only to have them send the
same "bad" information again, and again, and again, and again.

If folks want to isolate misbehaving peers, do an ADMIN SHUTDOWN on the
session.



Current thread: