Re: Google peering in LAX

[Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>]

On 3/2/20 4:32 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> That said, I fear this is going to be a problem long term. A blind “no /24s” filter is dangerous, plus it might solve 
> all traffic issues. It is going to take effort to be sure you don’t get bitten by the Law Of Unintended Consequences.


As soon as Google un-freezes new peering requests so I can get a direct 
peering that includes appropriate /24's I've been told offlist I should 
get (instead of the route server subset) I'll happily remove the transit 
filters. But I can only work with what I'm given.