anyone else seeing very long AS paths?

Jared Mauch jared at
Mon Feb 16 18:03:09 UTC 2009

On Feb 16, 2009, at 12:57 PM, John van Oppen wrote:

> I am also a bit leery of setting it much lower than the defaults due  
> to
> the possibility of filtering something my customers will care about...
> I am not sure what the best strategy is but what really bit a couple  
> of
> our customers was their old IOSes that tore the sessions down.   I  
> note
> that most of our customers speaking BGP had no issue just three out of
> about 25.
> What do people think is a reasonable maximum as-path length to enforce
> at ones edge?

	Would you want your upstream to set an arbitrary limit on these  
announcements for you, or should the few wayward souls finally upgrade  
their code?  If your upstream were to set a limit (64, 96, 128, 192,  
255) what would you expect that to be and how should it be disclosed?

	my opinion is that if you're going to operate in an active  
environment (eg: bgp) where messages are constantly being sent, you  
need to be an active participant in managing your risk.  If you're  
not, perhaps you don't really need BGP since you can't afford the  
'operational costs' of managing that asset.

	- Jared

More information about the NANOG mailing list