Would love a pm on the platform in question Sent from my iPhone
On 2011-02-25, at 12:23 PM, "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org> wrote: > Yes, very scary actually.... > > Human error is unavoidable - it's going to happen at times - BUT.... > > In our communities design, there has been times where we have missed > a tag > on an inbound customer for example. It scares the crap out of me to > think > that something like that simple mistake could cause route leakage. > Thankfully, anytime it has happened it would caught pretty quickly > and fixed > - in the meantime the routes simply didn't leave our network (the > way it > should be). > > Obviously the scales are different between someone like ourselves > and that > of TATA - but the principles and common sense remain. > > Paul > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard A Steenbergen [mailto:r...@e-gerbil.net] > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 12:52 PM > To: Jared Mauch > Cc: NANOG list > Subject: Re: 6453 routing leaks (January and Today) > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 07:22:36AM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote: >> Update: >> >> I have had a source ask me to post the following: >> >> -- snip -- >> The problem with route leaking was caused by specific routing >> platform >> resulting in some peer routes not being properly tagged. >> We are deploying additional measures to prevent this from happening >> in >> the future >> -- snip -- > > Hopefully someone learned a lesson about BGP community design, and how > it should fail safe by NOT leaking if you accidentally fail to tag a > route. Always require a positive match on a route to advertise to > peers, > not the absence of a negative match. > > -- > Richard A Steenbergen <r...@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras > GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 > 2CBC) > >