nanog mailing list archives
Re: Blackhole Routes
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () mci com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:32:58 +0000 (GMT)
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Randy Bush wrote:
If every BGP session in your network is protected by a max-prefix limit, no matter who leaks, the damage will be limited and contained.true, also not univeral,the problem with max-prefix is it does not say *which* prefixes. so even if the drop-bgp stoopidity is corrected, you could end up holding the bogus prefixes, not the good ones.
true, however, my point was that not even the basics are being done :(
Current thread:
- Re: Blackhole Routes, (continued)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Erik Haagsman (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Wayne E. Bouchard (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Deepak Jain (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Wayne E. Bouchard (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Richard A Steenbergen (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Mark Kasten (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Richard A Steenbergen (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Erik Haagsman (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Jeff Aitken (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Christopher L. Morrow (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Randy Bush (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Christopher L. Morrow (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Will Yardley (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Richard A Steenbergen (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Pete Templin (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Deepak Jain (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Christopher L. Morrow (Sep 30)
- Re: Blackhole Routes Petri Helenius (Sep 30)