[170755] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGPMON Alert Questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Tue Apr 8 06:49:51 2014
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
To: Jac Kloots <Jac.Kloots@surfnet.nl>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:49:10 +0200
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1404081116590.16685@jacbook-air.local>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Reply-To: mark.tinka@seacom.mu
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--nextPart4554934.Jt2G24ZdDA
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tuesday, April 08, 2014 11:24:07 AM Jac Kloots wrote:
> We (SURFnet, AS1103) are in the same position and I wrote
> an article about the evaluation we did before deciding
> on dropping invalids (https://blog.surfnet.nl/?p=3D3159)
Sounds great, Jac!
In your report, you mention that you're not validating=20
customer prefixes. Is this still the case?
Mark.
--nextPart4554934.Jt2G24ZdDA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)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=rPM+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart4554934.Jt2G24ZdDA--
