North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...
On Sep 11 15:23, Randy Bush wrote: } Subject: Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ... % I also think it may be time we refuse to peer with anyone % who inhibits LSR, as it seems that validation is now mandatory. % I think we should be sending out a "LSR is mandatory" notice % to our peers. Comments? LSR is actually a significant security issue. So, while I do understand and am sympathetic to the operational debugging issues that LSR addresses, I think that requiring a peer to enable LSR more than 2 hops inside their network from the outside world is unreasonable. In a world where SSH were available in cisco routers and/or IPsec were more widely deployed, I might have different views. However, we are where we are. Regards, Ran email@example.com