[189850] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Bogon ASN Filter Policy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Wed Jun 8 09:27:34 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Michael Hare <michael.hare@wisc.edu>, Arnold Nipper <arnold@nipper.de>,
Jay Borkenhagen <jayb@att.com>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:25:28 +0200
In-Reply-To: <DM3PR0601MB20111B3B34E60E719053AC1CF95E0@DM3PR0601MB2011.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 8/Jun/16 14:56, Michael Hare wrote:
> I'm not against the theory of what is being proposed, but I was surprised to see little discussion of this announcement on list.
>
> Upon examination on my view of the DFZ from AS3128 I see over 400 upstream routes falling into this category, mostly in the 64512 - 65534 range. Based on our flow bandwidth stats we chose to reach out to several origin ASN, two fairly well known, as a courtesy.
>
> For the *TT's who are planning on implementing shortly, have you went through a similar diagnostic effort and what might you share or report on such endeavors?
At the very least, "remove-private-as" should be a standard step in the
procedure of turning up any eBGP session.
Mark.
