|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:31:25 EST." <16B2B37C-C4CD-43A2-9270-17B1FF835253@puck.nether.net> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:17:03 -0500 Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>, Greg Whynott <Greg.Whynott@oicr.on.ca> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org --==_Exmh_1289431023_10615P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:31:25 EST, Jared Mauch said: > The best question is: > > Do you know what prefix you just lost reachability to, or do you just > point default as a last resort anyways, so don't know. One has to wonder how many places are using the prepend-me-harder commands to do traffic engineering, and have absolutely no clue that their prepends are having the opposite effect because the prefix is being dropped entirely by some AS's. I suppose the exact same issue applies for those places that deaggregate in an attempt to to TE, and the de-aggregated prefixes get munched by somebody's prefix-length filter. --==_Exmh_1289431023_10615P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFM2yfvcC3lWbTT17ARAq59AJ0dWHOT2FwmzUZn9w2lqzvi2d8o5gCeO+uH hvU6BKrq3pXOcVRmV4P10ag= =4GtK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1289431023_10615P--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |