[admin] [summary] RE: YouTube IP Hijacking

Jared Mauch jared at puck.nether.net
Tue Feb 26 18:21:23 UTC 2008


	The biggest problem here is that Cisco needs to change
their defaults to require more configuration than

router bgp X
 neighbor 1.2.3.4 remote-as A

When that's the bar for the complexity required for setting up BGP,
bad things WILL happen.  Period.

	Cisco has taken all these years and not stepped up in providing
any sort of a reasonable change to the marketplace as others have done.

	This hurts the industry as a whole, and hurts the perception
that "we can't route".

	As for other problems with leadership, there's no good way to
manage large configurations on the platforms, nor a reasonable size
of NVRAM provided either.

	The list goes on and on, and I've communicated this more than once
to the company.  Nobody cares about this basic infrasturcture at Cisco,
or at least nobody that can make something happen.  Instead people care
about what product is intruding on their turf and how to defend it instead
of building a better product and improving things.

	Honestly, it's a lost cause and SP's don't account for any
significant amount of revenue.  If someone at Cisco cares to address these
things, i'm interested in helping but it's clear that the head-in-the-sand
policy by upper mgmt lives on and they'd rather fight amongst themselves
and risk the industry as a whole because of their antics.

	- Jared

(speaking as someone who has built large ACLs/prefix-lists and has 
6MB+ configs that can't be loaded on my routers.  without vendor support
those that want to do the right thing can't, so the game is lost).

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared at puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.



More information about the NANOG mailing list