nanog mailing list archives

asymmetric routes/security concerns/Fortinet


From: Greg Whynott <Greg.Whynott () oicr on ca>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 12:40:32 -0500



Hello,

we have multiple internet connections of which one is a research network where many medical institutions and 
universities are also connected to threw out the country.  This research network (ORION) also has internet access but 
is not meant to be used as a primary path to the internet by its customers.     Connected to the ORION network are many 
sites we exchange email with daily who also have multiple internet connections.   One of these sites is not reachable 
by us.   After investigating,  it was discovered this site is dropping our connections as the path back to use would 
use a different interface on the firewall ( a Fortinet device) than that which it arrived upon.

The admins at this university claim this is by design and for security reasons..   My response was the entire internet 
is asymmetrical and while this may of been a legitimate concern in the 90's,  I don't think its a real concern anymore 
if things are set up correctly.  They suggested we add static routes to our equipment to address this…  This seems like 
a bad idea and I am not comfortable adjusting my routing table to address one site's issues on the internet due to 
their (not ours) routing/security policies.

am I correct here?  any comments on this would be greatly appreciated as I'll be called into a meeting to discuss this 
further (they are digging in their heals in on this,  and higher ups are getting involved now).  I'd like to arm myself 
with a few perspectives.

thanks very much for your time again,

greg





--

This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the 
intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. 
Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.


Current thread: