[32234] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Trusting BGP sessions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Wed Nov 15 02:50:15 2000
Date: 14 Nov 2000 23:48:22 -0800
Message-ID: <20001115074822.15909.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: davediaz@iwcinc.net
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Ok, let me show why this isn't a valid reason.
Me: Will you peer with me on both coasts with this bandwidth using this
protocol?
BigISP: No, because we don't trust .....
Me: Will you sell me the same, identical connections in multiple locations
using the same, identical protocols?
BigISP: Of course, yes.
Me: If you have systems in place to protect your network against my network
as a customer, why don't those exact same systems work when you connect
the same network, router and protocol as a peer?
BigISP: Its too complicated, and you wouldn't understand.
Question: historically have more routing snafus originated in "customer"
BGP sessions or in "peer" BGP sessions?
On Tue, 14 November 2000, David Diaz wrote:
> Sorry, Yes.
> My original answer mentioned in the past. I think we all understand
> that the "business" side has entered.
>
> However someone connecting to your peering router can create a create
> deal of havoc. Some of the older routers could have a major problem
> with floods of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of routes
> being added or withdrawn quickly. At the same time if the peer is
> flapping and rerouting hunderds of megs to different exchange points,
> first east coast then west, it could cause a serious problem. I know
> you know that Sean.
>
