[182455] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AW: AW: Prefix-Hijack by AS7514
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matsuzaki Yoshinobu)
Fri Jul 17 05:46:41 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 18:46:26 +0900 (JST)
To: colinj@gt86car.org.uk
From: Matsuzaki Yoshinobu <maz@iij.ad.jp>
In-Reply-To: <A971D7E9-F20C-45FC-B78B-B6F66A6FB0F0@gt86car.org.uk>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Colin Johnston <colinj@gt86car.org.uk> wrote
> even if customer router crash fault, should have been filtered via
> prefix list blocking to only allow customer network prefixs to be
> anounced onwards ? as per best practice
Yes, I agree, and we have done that. How about peering partners -
which is our case this time. Is it feasible to maintain strict
inbound prefix filters for all peering relationships?
-----
Matsuzaki Yoshinobu <maz@iij.ad.jp>
- IIJ/AS2497 INOC-DBA: 2497*629
