[183194] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [c-nsp] Peering + Transit Circuits
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Durack)
Tue Aug 18 12:04:58 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <7029C38A-B3D9-4D23-A876-5266EE63B309@granados-llc.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:02:48 -0400
From: Tim Durack <tdurack@gmail.com>
To: Scott Granados <scott@granados-llc.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>,
"cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net" <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Scott Granados <scott@granados-llc.net>
wrote:
> So in our case we terminate peering and transit on different routers.
> Peering routers have well flow enabled (the one that starts with a J that=
=E2=80=99s
> inline). With NFSEN / NFDUMP we=E2=80=99re able to collect that flow dat=
a and look
> for anomalous flows or other issues. We pretty much detect and then deal
> with peering issues rather than prevent them with whitelists and so forth
> but then again we=E2=80=99ve been lucky and not experienced to many issue=
s other
> than the occasional leakage of prefixes and such which maxprefix handles
> nicely.
>
>
Can I ask why you terminate peering and transit on different routers? (Not
suggesting that is bad, just trying to understand the reason.)
Tim:>
