<div dir="auto">Mark,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Nope .. it is the other way around.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It is all easy if you look from your network centric view.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">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...</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">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.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best Regards,</div><div dir="auto">R.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 9, 2020, 06:36 Mark Tinka via NANOG <<a href="mailto:nanog@nanog.org">nanog@nanog.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 8/Sep/20 23:22, Douglas Fischer via
NANOG wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:courier new,monospace;font-size:small">Exactly Mike!<br>
<br>
The Idea would be to define some base levels, to make the
creations of route-filtering simpler to everyone in the world.<br>
And what comes beyond that, is in charge of each autonomous
system.<br>
<br>
It would make the scripting and templates easier and would
avoid fat-fingers.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
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?<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</div>
</blockquote></div>