[180986] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Open letter to Level3 concerning the global routing issues on
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Sat Jun 13 06:37:29 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>, jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 12:34:35 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20150612171247.GO94733@Vurt.local>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 12/Jun/15 19:12, Job Snijders wrote:
>
>
> The simplest protection mechanism of all: maximum prefix limits. If you
> turn up a peer or customer, confirm with them how many routes you should
> expect, add 15% and configure that.
For peering and customers, we set a default prefix limit value for IPv4
and IPv6. We only change this if the peer/customer informs us that they
will announce a lot more than what we've configured. We add some % to
cover for "sudden" growth, but not too much to impact the network.
For customers, we add prefix lists and AS_PATH filters as mandatory.
I'm sure others do the same. It would be good if we all did.
I know the largest transit providers tend to be more relaxed for various
reasons. Some rely on filters generated by IRR entries, others don't.
A lot more work is needed, indeed. It's not 2008 anymore...
Mark.
