Wrong use of 100.64.0.0/10
James Bensley
jwbensley at gmail.com
Fri Oct 2 15:44:32 UTC 2015
On 2 October 2015 at 16:10, Marco Paesani <marco at paesani.it> wrote:
> Hi Justin,
> I know that we must filter this type of route, but AS9498 (upstream) MUST
> accept only correct networks.
> Or not ?
> Ciao,
> Marco
You are correct.
AS-9730 shoudn't be advertising this range.
AS-9498 shouldn't be accepting this range, and they shouldn't be
advertising it on.
AS-5580 shouldn't be accepting this range, and they shouldn't be
advertising it on.
In fact if we look at LINX as an example, many ASNs are accepting this
route and advertising it on again. Possibly becasue they use the same
filter list for inbound and outbound advertisements so an inbound
mistake just gets echo'ed out to everyone else :(
route-views.linx.routeviews.org> show ip bgp 100.64.0.0/10 longer-prefixes
BGP table version is 0, local router ID is 195.66.225.222
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
r RIB-failure, S Stale, R Removed
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
* 100.100.1.0/24 195.66.224.83 0 5511 9498 9730 ?
*> 195.66.225.86 0 34288 9498 9730 i
* 195.66.224.51 0 6453 5511
9498 9730 i
* 195.66.224.53 10 0 8928 5511
9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.236.35 0 6067 6453
5511 9498 9730 i
* 195.66.225.109 0 41811 9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.224.153 100 0 6762 5511
9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.224.118 0 14537 9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.224.39 0 3561 5511
9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.224.233 0 0 19151 9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.224.175 1 0 13030 9498 9730 ?
* 195.66.236.175 1 0 13030 9498 9730 ?
Cheers,
James.
More information about the NANOG
mailing list