[180995] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Open letter to Level3 concerning the global routing issues on
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Justin M. Streiner)
Sat Jun 13 10:16:36 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 10:16:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <557C073B.1050108@seacom.mu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Sat, 13 Jun 2015, Mark Tinka wrote:
> 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...
At my previous job (regional ISP with a decent amount of BGP-speaking
downstream customers), we did prefix and AS-PATH filtering on all customer
sessions. The only thing lacking at that time (1997-2004) was a decent
way to automate changes - everything was pretty manual. That said, it
kept issues caused by customers leaking routes back to us down to pretty
much nil.
jms
