nanog mailing list archives
Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP (WAS Re: ALGX problems?)
From: Joe Wood <joew () accretive-networks net>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Mark Kent wrote:
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.
;> Actually, my intent was to get more of a representation on who actually cares enough to try and prevent these leaks that I see from my peers frequently. Those that don't really do anything to prevent these leaks would be the peers that I would begin doing agressive filtering on our sessions. I would think that all the ISP's represented on this list get wacked enough on other list topics, they probably don't need any more beatings about this.... Take care, Joe
Current thread:
- Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP, (continued)
- 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 Jared Mauch (Aug 15)
- 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)