[167424] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Routing asymetry and RPF check
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Saku Ytti)
Wed Dec 11 12:04:05 2013
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 19:03:46 +0200
From: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <slrnlah3k7.2ulf.aditya@tiny.grot.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On (2013-12-11 16:10 +0000), R.P. Aditya wrote:
> Some problems never go away, just reappear periodically -- strict uRPF
> (and even loose uRPF) on transit provider peering interfaces are going
> to have unintended consequences as long as their is routing asymmetry
I can't imagine why uRPF/loose would be problematic. If you're originating
traffic from prefix which you're not advertising to DFZ and you still expect
it to work, your expectation are at fault, not uRPF/loose.
However uRPF/strict feasible won't work, while occasionally some people seem
to think it does.
--
++ytti
