[95188] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Where are static bogon filters appropriate? was: 96.2.0.0/16
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Tue Mar 6 12:03:01 2007
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 18:02:06 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0703041642240.10688@clifden.donelan.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Sean Donelan wrote:
> When customers misconfigure their router, e.g. wrong BGP neighbor or
> ASN, wrong interface IP address, exceed max prefix limit, etc; don't
> they lose Internet connectivity until they fix it?
>
> A properly configure router should never forward even a single bad
> packet. If it does, isn't it likely to have configuration problems so
> why continue to keep misconfigured routers connected?
>
> Customers are unlikely to fix problems which don't cause them to lose
> service.
Even though the BOFH in me agrees with you, I also know that every cent on
my paycheck comes from the customers, so I prefer not to treat them like
crap. If I can protect the internet from my customers by doing uRPF or
source IP based filtering, I achieve the same thing as you but with less
customer impact.
Also, all the examples you give implies a BGP transit customer. I am
imagining all kinds of customers, from colo customers where I am their
default gateway, to residential customers where it's the same way.
Disabling their port and punting them to customer support is NOT a cost
efficient way of dealing with the problems, at least not in the market I
am in.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
