[43417] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP noise tonight? (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Tue Oct 9 12:37:52 2001
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 12:37:06 -0400
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net>
To: "Christopher A. Woodfield" <rekoil@semihuman.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu, abha <ahuja@wibh.net>,
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, jlewis@lewis.org
Message-ID: <20011009123706.H16103@puck.nether.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20011009122755.C1042@semihuman.com>; from rekoil@semihuman.com on Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 12:27:55PM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 12:27:55PM -0400, Christopher A. Woodfield wrote:
>
> As it turns out, both 2008 and 3300 are Infonet, US and Europe. So this
> was their foo.
>
> The problem is obviously that the RFC-proscribed behavior with bad
> prefixes works on paper, as it serves to isolate the network originating
> the problem prefix. However, that is totally dependent on /every/ router
> doing so, thus preventing the problem from spreading, which as we
> discovered, does not happen.
>
> The ideal alternative behavior is to drop the bad prefix--not dropping
> the peer, but not passing the bad prefix along either. I've been told that
> there are recent Cisco IOS revs that do this instead of passing it along,
> but they have other unresolved bugs that prevent their widespread use.
>
> Should someone think about possibly updating the RFC?
you are stuck in the situation that operators are faced in deciding
what software to run on their network. if the internet-draft is updated
you still need vendors to change their behavior and people to upgrade.
- jared
