[196345] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AS36040 Prefix Limits
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Fri Oct 20 04:43:04 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 08:17:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <C3367CE0-336E-469A-A388-912D263AF357@nosignal.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
It is in conjunction with a route server. The filtering I meant would be th=
at network A wants the IX to drop all advertisements to them from network B=
. Normally solved by network B putting a community on their routes to not a=
dvertise to network A, but network B doesn't want to do one-off configs.=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
Midwest-IX=20
http://www.midwest-ix.com=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Davidson" <andy@nosignal.org>=20
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>=20
Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>=20
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 1:20:08 AM=20
Subject: Re: AS36040 Prefix Limits=20
Hi, Mike=20
On 18/10/2017, 18:39, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:=20
> I am looking for someone that can speak authoritatively regarding AS36040=
's=20
> ability to change their own prefix limits, prefix filtering, etc.=20
> My current contact is advising the IX to do the filtering for them, which=
=20
> is not something IXes should be doing.=20
Unless this is in conjunction with a multilateral peering session (=E2=80=
=9Croute-server=E2=80=9D), when prefix-filtering is something that the IXP =
very much should be doing.=20
Andy=20
