[j-nsp] Q. Is anyone deploying TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) on their BGP peering Sessions?

Hi Team, Q. Is anyone deploying TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) on their BGP peering Sessions? I’m not touching routers right now. I’m wondering if anyone has deployed, your experiences, and thoughts? This is suppose to be the “replacement” for BGP MD5, ‘but’ I’m hearing ….. 1. The Vendors

Re: [j-nsp] Clarification of EOL policies

On 5/10/10 12:32 PM, "Richard A Steenbergen" wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 08:51:05AM +, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I'm a bit puzzled by the EOL policies. According to >> , JUNOS 8.5 has its >> first transition event on 2010-11-16 (whatever

Re: [j-nsp] JUNOS vulnerability with malformed TCP packets

> > The information is in the security advisory. > > Are the PSNs the security advisory you are referring to? > > I didn't see a security advisory as such, and I'm wondering if I'm > missing anything. Yes. Juniper has been using the Tech Bulletins (PSNs, etc.) for our Security Advisories. h

Re: [j-nsp] JUNOS vulnerability with malformed TCP packets

> Does anyone know how far Juniper is planning to back port this fix > into their software? > > I am basically asking because I am sure a few of us are running some > older Juniper hardware and would like to figure out where we stand. > > Like 8.1x is not EOL until 05/06/2010 but ENG support st

Re: [j-nsp] Juniper BGP invalid attributes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 > 1) Routers shouldn't be leaking confederation information > into AS4_PATH. > This is the issue that Juniper covers under PSN-2009-01-200, > and all code built after 2009-01-26 appears to be fixed in > this regard. This is the same issue that