[157771] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Indonesian ISP Moratel announces Google's prefixes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (joel jaeggli)
Wed Nov 7 00:51:50 2012
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 00:48:45 -0500
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <22C81BE5-5A07-40E3-9608-1FE42B04713B@ianai.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 11/7/12 12:13 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Nov 07, 2012, at 00:07 , Jian Gu <guxiaojian@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Where did you get the idea that a Moratel customer announced a google-owned
>> prefix to Moratel and Moratel did not have the proper filters in place?
>> according to the blog, all google's 4 authoritative DNS server networks and
>> 8.8.8.0/24 were wrongly routed to Moratel, what's the possiblity for a
>> Moratel customers announce all those prefixes?
> Ah, right, they just leaked Google's prefix. I thought a customer originated the prefix.
>
> Original question still stands. Which attribute do you expect Google to set to stop this?
>
> Hint: Don't say No-Advertise, unless you want peers to only talk to the adjacent AS, not their customers or their customers' customers, etc.
>
> Looking forward to your answer.
I would expect that moratel should have a route object which their
transit providers can construct a prefix filter for. if moratel
advertised an AS path including themselves and a google orgin pccw
should not have accepted it. if they originated the prefix, pccw should
not have accepted it.
