[65927] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Routeviews and possible 0/0 route
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Thu Dec 18 18:55:22 2003
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 18:54:44 -0500
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20031218231217.GA12217@1-4-5.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message written on Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:12:17PM -0800, David Meyer =
wrote:
> Nope to the former. Someone (6461) is advertising it. We
Speaking for 6461, if a customer asks for a default route, we send
them one.
The {problem,cool thing} about route-views is many people send it a full
table. That can {cause all sorts of analysis problems,give you a view
into things you wouldn't normally see}. YMMV.
--=20
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE/4j5ENh6mMG5yMTYRAhdXAKCELzsbWXvsAGAcYNHoS1uRpzvRbQCfRRFt
mlI2cCYK8BPfXd/ecq4TIfE=
=lmVD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5--
