[12281] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Thu Sep 11 18:58:08 1997
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 97 15:54 PDT
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: rja@corp.home.net (Ran Atkinson)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> LSR is actually a significant security issue. So, while I do
> understand and am sympathetic to the operational debugging
> issues that LSR addresses, I think that requiring a peer to
> enable LSR more than 2 hops inside their network from the
> outside world is unreasonable.
So, you're comfortable with asking for LSR at the IX and a hop behind?
> In a world where SSH were available in cisco routers and/or
> IPsec were more widely deployed, I might have different views.
K5 does not give you sufficient warm fuzzies?
randy
