Long AS Path

Mel Beckman mel at beckman.org
Wed Jun 21 20:45:16 CST 2017


Why not ask the operator why they are pretending this path? Perhaps they have a good explanation that you haven't thought of. Blindly limiting otherwise legal path lengths is not a defensible practice, in my opinion.

 -mel beckman

On Jun 21, 2017, at 1:36 PM, "sthaug at nethelp.no" <sthaug at nethelp.no> wrote:

>>> I see no valid reason for such long AS paths. Time to update filters
>>> here. I'm tempted to set the cutoff at 30 - can anybody see a good
>>> reason to permit longer AS paths?
>> 
>> Well, as I mentioned in my Net Neutrality filing to the FCC, a TTL of 30
>> is OK for intra-planet routing, but when you start leaving the big blue
>> marble you will need to allow the packets to live longer.
> 
> TTL != AS path length
> 
> I can certainly see the use for a TTL of 30. I cannot see the use for
> an AS path length greater than 30 (especially not when 2 ASes are each
> repeated 16 times).
> 
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no
> 
> 


More information about the NANOG mailing list