[108745] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What's with all the long aspaths?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hank Nussbacher)
Thu Oct 23 15:33:41 2008
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:33:28 +0200 (IST)
From: Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il>
To: Philip Smith <pfs@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <49009FDD.1090301@cisco.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008, Philip Smith wrote:
> Jon Lewis said the following on 23/10/08 12:39:
>> Is there something silly going around? I doubt I'm the only one
>> noticing these being triggered by our generous maxas-limit setting.
>>
>> Oct 9 23:01:46: %BGP-6-ASPATH: ... 27754 27754 27754 ...
>> Oct 17 11:10:40: %BGP-6-ASPATH: ... 43413 43413 43413 ...
>> Oct 22 06:34:09: %BGP-6-ASPATH: ... 38230 38230 38230 ...
>>
>> Anyone have theories as to what these networks are trying to accomplish?
>
> Theories include:
>
> - trying to make a /20 announcement more important than a component /24
> by prepending the /24 out of sight (i'm not joking, some people really
> believe this!!)
>
> - trying to over-ride policy that their upstream provider has applied
> (e.g. my prepended /20 is a backup to my main /20 announcement but my
> upstream on the backup path is local pref-ing high to make them look
> more "peerable")
>
> There are bound to be other reasons... :-)
My theory - some netadmin trying to see if anything bad happens when he
does it. Sort of like the Darwin winner who's last words are "I wonder
what would happen if I tri..."
-Hank
