[96317] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BOGON Announcement question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Provo)
Mon Apr 30 12:06:48 2007
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:04:57 -0400
From: Joe Provo <nanog-post@rsuc.gweep.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Reply-To: nanog-post@rsuc.gweep.net
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0704301114210.32408@soloth.lewis.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:16:03AM -0400, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Jason Lewis wrote:
> >I'm seeing this announced at CIXP
> >
> >Collector: CIXP
> >Prefix: 128.0.0.0/2
> >Last update time: 2007-04-27 07:36:30Z
> >Peer: 192.65.185.140
> >Origin: 29222
> >
> >My question is, why am I not seeing more issues because of the
> >announcement?
Other than gabage hijacking, potential blackholing, or stage 2 of
redirecting traffic [where stage 1 would require a total outage
for the real traffic], what "more issues" would you expect?
> > Is it just not propagating out of the exchange? It's been
> >announced for a few days and only seems to appear at the exchange.
Members at that exchange would be able to answer: how are they
seeing it, is it NO-EXPORT tagged, etc.
> It's so 'non-specific', all it's going to catch is traffic for
> destinations for which there is no route in the global table. i.e. it's
> likely nobody would notice it (nothing broken) unless looking for it.
To randy's point, folks who are caring enough to filter often have
ceiling filters to prevent utter silliness. The interesting experiement
would be who would propagate it if there was an IRR entry for it.
route-views.oregon-ix.net>sho ip bgp 128.0.0.0/2
% Network not in table
route-views.oregon-ix.net>
...so it is being stepped on appropriately by at least
AS29222:AS-TRANSIT.
Cheers,
Joe
--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
