<html><head></head><body>HE doesn't provide any community based TE and I would say they're a pretty major network.<br><br>Filip<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 14 June 2019 2:17:43 am GMT+02:00, Joe Provo <nanog-post@rsuc.gweep.net> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:58:20AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">Hey Joe,<br><br>On 12 Jun 2019, at 12:37, Joe Provo <nanog-post@rsuc.gweep.net> wrote:<br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:10:00PM +0000, David Guo via NANOG wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">Send abuse complaint to the upstreams<br></blockquote><br>...and then name & shame publicly. AS-path forgery "for TE" was<br>never a good idea. Sharing the affected prefix[es]/path[s] would<br>be good.<br></blockquote><br>I realise lots of people dislike AS_PATH stuffing with other peoples' AS numbers and treat it as a form of hijacking.<br><br>However, there's an argument that AS_PATH is really just a<br>loop-avoidance mechanism, not some kind of AS-granular traceroute<br>for prefix propagation. In that sense, stuffing 9327 into a prefix<br>as a mechanism to stop that prefix being accepted by AS 9327 seems<br>almost reasonable. (I assume this is the kind of TE you are talking<br>about.)<br><br>What is the principal harm of doing this? Honest question. I'm<br>not advocating for anything, just curious.<br></blockquote><br>There is no way at a distance to tell the difference between:<br>- legitimate AS forwarding<br>- ham-fistedly attempting "innocent" TE away from the forged AS<br>- maliciously hiding traffic from the forged AS<br>- an error with the forged AS<br><br>IME, when you can NOT look like an error or an attack, that's a <br>Good Thing.<br><br>The last "major" provider who failed to provide BGP community-based<br>TE was 3549, and with their absorbtion into 3356 no one should have<br>any tolerance for this garbage, IMNSHO.<br><br>Cheers,<br><br>joe<br><br></pre></blockquote></div><br>-- <br>Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>