RE: No one behind the wheel at WorldCom

["Frank Scalzo" <frank.scalzo () amerinex net>]

What vendor by default does not take action on no-export???

Certainly cisco and juniper both honor it by default. 

To get back to the original question of 63/9 being announced it can be entertaining to watch for other fishy routes to 
show up in the routing table, like 63/8. I know of at least one outage caused because someone advertised a route like 
that. The underlying problem, is that there are no good widely deployed solutions for controlling what the large 
backbones inject into the routing table at peering points. A large tier 1 deaggregates towards another bad things 
happen. It would be nice if there was a supportable way to only allow one isp to advertise appropriate routes to 
another. The IRR stuff is a neat idea but I dont think many ISPs trust it enough to use it to build ACLs.


-----Original Message-----
From:   Stephen Stuart [mailto:stuart () tech org]
Sent:   Sat 7/13/2002 7:00 PM
To:     nanog () merit edu
Cc:     Paul Schultz
Subject:        Re: No one behind the wheel at WorldCom 


> I'm wondering how many folks out there choose not to honor this
> community and why.  If anyone on the list chooses not to I'd be
> interested to hear (either on-list or off) the reasonings behind it.

Please also respond if you weren't aware that you have to explicitly
implement the policy of honoring no-export - while the community vaue
is "well-known," the policy is not built-in.