Re: BGP noise tonight? (fwd)

["Joel Baker" <lucifer () lightbearer com>]

On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 12:27:55PM -0400, Christopher A. Woodfield wrote:
> As it turns out, both 2008 and 3300 are Infonet, US and Europe. So this 
> was their foo.
>
> The problem is obviously that the RFC-proscribed behavior with bad 
> prefixes works on paper, as it serves to isolate the network originating 
> the problem prefix. However, that is totally dependent on /every/ router 
> doing so, thus preventing the problem from spreading, which as we 
> discovered, does not happen.
>
> The ideal alternative behavior is to drop the bad prefix--not dropping 
> the peer, but not passing the bad prefix along either. I've been told that 
> there are recent Cisco IOS revs that do this instead of passing it along, 
> but they have other unresolved bugs that prevent their widespread use.
>
> Should someone think about possibly updating the RFC?

It's already written. However, the general impression a month and a half
ago was that it wasn't likely to go anywhere. Since I'm not really up to
trying to make headway in the relevant groups, anyone who *does* feel like
it and wants to see the proposal should feel welcome to contact me off-list
about it. It's really a fairly obvious set of extensions (and can, in fact,
be done with only extensions).
-- 
***************************************************************************
Joel Baker                           System Administrator - lightbearer.com
lucifer () lightbearer com              http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/