North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: No one behind the wheel at WorldCom
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:email@example.com] Sent: Sat 7/13/2002 7:00 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org 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.