[56637] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: 69/8...this sucks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Mar 11 14:41:50 2003
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:40:58 -0800
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net>
Cc: Ejay Hire <ejay.hire@isdn.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0303111303090.5497-100000@thunder.xecu.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Great. If you can get _EVERYONE_ to listen to Rob's server, I'm all for
it. Frankly, I was unaware of Rob's server. However, I think it makes
more sense to have the people maintaining the data distribute the data
directly from the source. Right now, I'm betting that Rob's server requires
someone in Rob's organization to keep up to date on all the RIRs and
manually
tweak the contents of his list.
What is the perceived advantage to the extra layer of indirection?
Owen
--On Tuesday, March 11, 2003 1:11 PM -0500 Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>>
>> In short, it doesn't. Longer answer, if the ISP configures his router
>> correctly, he can actually refuse to accept advertisements from other
>> sessions that are longer versions of prefixes received through this
>> session.
>>
>> However, it's primarily intended to solve the non-malicious, but somewhat
>> malignant problem of out-of-date bogon filters by people trying to do the
>> right thing.
>
> So why does it need to be done by somebody "official"? Why make
> organizations who don't have route servers do this?
>
> I've been peering with Rob's bogon server for a little while, and it works
> great. All of my customers get routes that point the bogons to a traffic
> sink on my network. If they were so inclined, they could sink that traffic
> before leaving their network.
>
> Andy
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Andy Dills 301-682-9972
> Xecunet, LLC www.xecu.net
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access
>
