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, "sth...@nethelp.no" <sth...@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, sth...@nethelp.no > >
