[93927] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Quick BGP peering question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Wed Jan 3 12:53:26 2007
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:31:35 -0600
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: James Blessing <james.blessing@entagroup.com>
Cc: nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <459BA4BA.3020809@entagroup.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
James Blessing wrote:
> Very simply : Would you accept traffic from a customer who insists on sending 0
> prefixes across a BGP session?
>
I just ran through a related issue with one of my upstream peers. It appears
that they have a RPF strictly enforced policy, yet during the process of
renumbering a customer of a customer from another ISPs space, they were wanting
to throw all traffic (our IPs and the other provider's) out to us.
It comes down to a simple question of policy, and if you are going to mandate
how your customers route proper, valid traffic. I about pulled the plug in my
situation, but finally got it sorted out. Thank goodness some routers can allow
exceptions to RPF and other providers just use ACLs instead.
0 prefixes is no different than partial prefixes. Asymmetric routing should not
be a crime on the Internet because "I don't like it" or "but basic RPF is easier
and you're doing something funky anyways".
Jack Bates
