Re: eBGP TTL matching requirement

[Patrick W. Gilmore]

On May 11, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Vitto Capabianco wrote:

 Is there a TTL value enforcment on EBGP session establishment

No.

-- 
TTFN,
patrick


 For some
 reason I thought that both peers have to have the SAMe value?  Is that
 true?  For example:
 
 default EBGP = TTL = 1 (if one end sends something other than 1 in its OPEN
 message, we won't bring up the adjecancy)
 multihop EBGP = TTL  = 255 (by default) - likewise, if one end sends
 something else, adjecancy won't come up
 multihop EBGP = TTL = modified hop value - ex. 15 (both ends have to have
 it)
 
 
 I understand that ttl-security and its implications.
 
 Thanks,
 
 Vitto
 

Re: eBGP TTL matching requirement

[Dobbins, Roland]

On May 12, 2010, at 1:10 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

 No.

Concur, but the original poster should also look at the GTSM, which doesn't do 
what he asked about but which does make use of TTL as a validation mechanism:

http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3682.txt

---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net // http://www.arbornetworks.com

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken