[164601] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AS3549 Level3/GBLX carrying routing for 10.0.0.0/8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (chip)
Mon Jul 22 15:53:38 2013
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLaag8OdQvQ15J8n9+H07-ytE2aaq7RSLAF8SJo3kWt9WVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:53:27 -0400
From: chip <chip.gwyn@gmail.com>
To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Perhaps we should all take a moment and review RFC 5735, 6598, 6890, and
5156 and implement filtering in the appropriate places and help make the
Internet a safer place to play. Think of the children!
...heh
--chip
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Siegel, David <David.Siegel@level3.com>
> wrote:
> > This should now be fixed.
> >
> > As a general matter of policy, we do filter out 10/8, but somehow the
> filter list for a customer was empty which then defaults to an implicit
> accept. We're in the process of improving our config audits to catch this
> in the future.
> >
>
> what happens if they register a route object for 10/8? :)
>
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Larry Sheldon [mailto:LarrySheldon@cox.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:31 PM
> > To: nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Re: AS3549 Level3/GBLX carrying routing for 10.0.0.0/8
> >
> > On 7/20/2013 11:26 PM, Yang Yu wrote:
> >> It appears AS3549 is announcing 10.0.0.0/8. I noticed it from an
> >> AS3549 customer.
> >
> > I wonder why people don't drop any update that contains stuff like RFC
> > 1918 space.
> > --
> > Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
> > of System Administrators:
> > Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
> > learn from their mistakes.
> > (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
> >
> >
>
>
--
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary, batteries not included, etc....
