Re: Peer Filtering

2009-02-03 Thread Nick Hilliard
That was one of our biggest worries people make mistakes and route leaks happen. They do. And it's not just mom+pop providers who occasionally leak an entire table. Big operators do it too. The unfortunate part we're faced with now is that we have several downstream customers who

Peer Filtering

2009-02-02 Thread Paul Stewart
Hi folks... I would like to know whether folks are limiting their peering sessions (BGP peering at public exchanges) only by max-prefix typically? Are we the only folks trying to filter all peers using IRR information? We've run across several peers now with 10,000+ prefixes who do not

Re: Peer Filtering

2009-02-02 Thread Martin Barry
$quoted_author = Paul Stewart ; I would like to know whether folks are limiting their peering sessions (BGP peering at public exchanges) only by max-prefix typically? Are we the only folks trying to filter all peers using IRR information? No, you're not the only ones. We've run across

Re: Peer Filtering

2009-02-02 Thread Martin Barry
$quoted_author = John van Oppen ; Here in the US we don't bother, max-prefix covers it... It seems that US originated prefixes are rather sporadically entered into the routing DBs. ...and you are not worried about someone leaking a subset of routes? I understand that most failure cases

RE: Peer Filtering

2009-02-02 Thread John van Oppen
Spectrum Networks LLC Direct: 206.973.8302 Main: 206.973.8300 Website: http://spectrumnetworks.us -Original Message- From: Martin Barry [mailto:ma...@supine.com] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 7:22 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Peer Filtering $quoted_author = John van Oppen ; Here