BGP offloading (fixing legacy router BGP scalability issues)

Valdis.Kletnieks at Valdis.Kletnieks at
Fri Apr 3 20:41:11 UTC 2015

On Fri, 03 Apr 2015 13:08:40 -0700, goemon at said:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2015, Barry Shein wrote:
> > On April 2, 2015 at 14:19 goemon at (goemon at wrote:
> > > a number of years back i did have someone contact in chinese and the
> > > response was that the customer was doing nothing wrong.
> > Ok, that's progress of a sort, what's the authoritative source of
> > right and wrong, something beyond "c'mon it's obvious!"?
> in their case the excuse was
> 1) they are a paying customer (thus can do no wrong)
> 2) they were breaking no chinese law (attacking US hosts)

And a moment's thought shows that attitude, while not very neighborly,
is an economically sound one - he maximizes his profit by doing nothing
about it.  Actually taking action results in the costs of taking action
*plus* the possibility of losing that customer's revenue.

Unless you demonstrate that his total profit actually increases by
dealing with the miscreants, he has no reason to do so.

We've been down this road before - we've had our own problems on this
side of the puddle with transit providers who refused to deal with problem
customers because the provider billed by the packet, and the customers were
good about paying their bill - so dealing with the problem caused less packets
and thus less revenue.

(The real problem here is, of course, that the *cost* of the abuse is an
externality born by somebody other than the provider who's enabling the
bad behavior...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 848 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list