[162185] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: route for linx.net in Level3?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Thu Apr 4 21:01:48 2013
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 10:01:34 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Tom Paseka <tom@cloudflare.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL89SgJDG77Ey2rRUKXYHbwY2Y4QfnucDhUrsqKrXnXXeH68+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>, Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>>>> Even if the exchange does not advertise the exchange LAN, it's
>>>> probably the case that it is in the IGP (or at least IBGP) of
>>>> everyone connected to it,
>>
>> yikes! this is quite ill-advised and i don't know anyone who does
>> this, but i think all my competitors should.
>>
>
> Its more common than uncommon.
>
> At WIX (Wellington), 64 out of 93 members will carry packets destined
> to APE (Auckland Exchange). (source:
> http://conference.apnic.net/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/50706/apnic34-mike-jager-securing-ixp-connectivity_1346119861.pdf)
> and this is just New Zealand!
>
> Just checked a few exchanges, not just are the IXP ranges being
> carried, they're being leaked:
i am not unhappy by the exchange mesh being carried within a member and
being propagated to their customer cone, see my nanog preso of feb 1997
and leo's recent post.
it's putting such things in one's igp that disgusts me. as joe said,
igp is just for the loopbacks and other interfaces it takes to make your
ibgp work.
randy
