There's a lot to sift through in this thread (most of all assertions lacking evidence), but this needs to be called out:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 06:21:56PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: [snip] > Point being that there are very very few ASNs using peer lock. Peer lock Despite the cutesy neologism, filtering against the acceptance of big/important/private peers's ASNs from unplanned vectors is very common and was a standard part of the belt and suspenders toolkit long, long ago.* When I drove 6079, I distinctly recall it coming up in conversations with representatives from 2828 (it might have been the concentric days) and others in the hallways at NANOG. Cheers, Joe * Barring those who never cared about forwarding quality or path integrity and would say "LOL someone gives me free transit to you". -- Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header. Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
