nanog mailing list archives
Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP (WAS Re: ALGX problems?)
From: Mark Kent <mark () noc mainstreet net>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:26:55 -0700 (PDT)
Joe Wood <joew () accretive-networks net> typed:
However, for ISP's that do NOT use any sort of prefix filters, wouldn't you prefer that your BGP session was limited to a number of prefixes, in case of a routing leak?
We'ld prefer that such ISPs identify themselves here so we can straighten them out. Wasn't that your intention when you asked this question: How many of you that currently do not filter your customer BGP sessions have max-prefixes configured? That seemed to me to be a small trick to get unsuspecting ISPs to wave their hands "Over here!", so that we could whack'em. -mark
Current thread:
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP, (continued)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Joe Wood (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Jared Mauch (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Joe Wood (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Jared Mauch (Aug 15)
- HPOV, Ciscoworks Blake Fithen (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Leo Bicknell (Aug 16)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP Chris Woodfield (Aug 16)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP (WAS Re: ALGX problems?) Joe Wood (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP (WAS Re: ALGX problems?) Mark Kent (Aug 15)
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP (WAS Re: ALGX problems?) Joe Wood (Aug 15)