not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...

Randy Bush randy at
Thu Sep 11 22:54:00 UTC 1997

> 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.

So, you're comfortable with asking for LSR at the IX and a hop behind?

> In a world where SSH were available in cisco routers and/or
> IPsec were more widely deployed, I might have different views.

K5 does not give you sufficient warm fuzzies?


More information about the NANOG mailing list