BGP Community - AS0 is de-facto "no-export-to" marker - Any ASN reserved to "export-only-to"?'

Sun Oct 4 03:04:03 UTC 2020

Sounds like you need a template based configuration management system and better automation more than you need to inflict an ad-hoc standardization of additional communities on the world.

Owen

> On Sep 9, 2020, at 12:21 AM, Robert Raszuk via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org> wrote:
> 
> Mark,
> 
> Nope .. it is the other way around.
> 
> It is all easy if you look from your network centric view.
> 
> But if I am connected to 10 ISPs in each POP I have to build 10 different egress policies, each embedding custom policy, teach NOC to understand it etc...
> 
> I think if there is a defined way to express prepend N times to my ISP peers across all uplinks or lower local pref in my ISP network in a same way to group of ISPs I see the value.
> 
> Best Regards,
> R.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020, 06:36 Mark Tinka via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org <mailto:nanog at nanog.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/Sep/20 23:22, Douglas Fischer via NANOG wrote:
> 
>> Exactly Mike!
>> 
>> The Idea would be to define some base levels, to make the creations of route-filtering simpler to everyone in the world.
>> And what comes beyond that, is in charge of each autonomous system.
>> 
>> It would make the scripting and templates easier and would avoid fat-fingers.
> 
> Are we saying that what individual operators design for their own networks is "complicated", and that coalescing around a single "de facto" standard would simplify that?
> 
> Mark.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20201003/79f65416/attachment.html>