small vent

Mon Jun 29 03:31:11 UTC 1998

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, David R. Conrad wrote:

> Actually, that was "a", what I call prefix theft.  I figure it is becoming
> more and more common, and I know of at least one case where it was an
> actual policy of a large network.

I don't see how it can be on the rise.  When FDT multihomed, we had to
arrange with both our providers to accept our route.  Why aren't all the
big providers putting distribute lists on their customer BGP peers?  The
access-lists should change infrequently enough that it wouldn't be a big
deal to maintain, and it would make the net a better place.  If I totaly
hose our BGP setup and announce crap to either provider, nobody will be
affected.  In fact, I think I did this the first night I setup BGP.
Nothing bad happened.

While they're at it, they could use the same data to setup/maintain
ingress filters.  Last I heard, Cisco had finally made it so that
non-logged extended access-list filtered packets are still fast switched.

------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jon Lewis <jlewis at fdt.net>  |  Spammers will be winnuked or 
 Network Administrator       |  drawn and quartered...whichever
 Florida Digital Turnpike    |  is more convenient.
______http://inorganic5.fdt.net/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key____