AGIS Route Flaps Interrupting its Peering?

Ed Kern ejk at
Fri Jul 5 14:25:08 UTC 1996

> One key point is that we have not received any complaints or reports
> of any sort concerning any perceived issues at mae-east from any
> mae-east peers.  Digex made no attempt to contact us.  We were already
> working with Advantis on the unreachable issue above, but the first we
> heard of the "AGIS attacks mae-east" report was when a Digex customer
> sent us a report similar to that forwarded to all of you by Cook.

Went into this in the last message...Digex will try and be more
proactive with pointing out Agis flapping prefixes in the future.

> An appropriate audience would have been the AGIS noc and the Digex
> noc.  I think the Cook approach was inappropriate because the issue
> was purely between Digex and AGIS until Cook distributed it to the
> three widespread mailing lists.

I agree..

> >   How is the report flawed?
> I see that Ed Kern has already replied indicating that the report was
> indeed flawed.  I don't think that there is anything to be gained by
> going into further detail.

What I was referring to was the internal circulation here...which I was
under the impression got to external im not so

The internal report was flawed because it relied to much on source
routes and came to some bad conclusions on the internal state of agis.

> My key point is that nothing of interest happened.  This was a
> non-issue until the misinformation was blasted around the Internet
> technical universe.

I would argue that the external message that got sent around was
misinformation...It was correct information from what the people
could see at the time it was released...(lots of dampened prefixes and
a down peer)..


More information about the NANOG mailing list