[113416] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP FlowSpec support on provider networks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Sat Apr 11 08:54:51 2009
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <75cb24520904102154j6143854ej59d52574cb97b5b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 08:52:19 -0400
Cc: "<nanog@nanog.org>" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 11, 2009, at 12:54 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:38 PM, John Payne <john@sackheads.org>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Apr 10, 2009, at 4:27 PM, "Fouant, Stefan" <Stefan.Fouant@neustar.biz
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I am trying to compile data on which providers are currently
>>> supporting
>>> BGP Flowspec at their edge, if there are any at all. The few
>>> providers
>>> I've reached out to have indicated they do not support this and
>>> have no
>>> intention of supporting this any time in the near future. I'm also
>>> curious why something so useful as to have the ability to
>>> advertise flow
>>> specification information in NLRI and distribute filtering
>>> information
>>> is taking so long to gain a foothold in the industry...
>>
>> Can you name 3 major vendors who support it? I suspect more
>> providers would
>
> juniper... and when they dropped the IPR stuff other vendors basically
> walked away :(
Causing consultations with lawyers by others involved with the draft.
Life is interesting.
IPR, Politics and techie communication skills. The path to failure.
- Jared
