On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 08:22:24AM -0400, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Jon Lewis wrote:
If filtering is inevitible, I think it's worth reviving the CIDR police and perhaps scaring some clue into the networks that stand to be filtered off the net by anyone needing to do any level of filtering. I agree.
The first step would be figuring out the needed aggregate announcements, contacting the providers or upstreams.
Who is willing to run a database to coordinate the effort?
In North America, most everybody has returned from holidays. Let's make September the month of CIDR improvement! And October 1st the deadline....
I do not agree the filters as originally proposed are "too aggressive". Traffic engineering with one's peers is all very well and good, but at the second AS (or overseas) it's not acceptable.
I think this is the most important point so far. There are a lot of providers that think that their announcements need to be global to manage link/load balancing with their peers/upstreams. Proper use of no-export (or similar) on the more specifics and the aggregate being sent out will reduce the global noise significantly. Perhaps some of the providers to these networks will nudge them a bit more to use proper techniques. I'm working on routing leaks this month. There have already been over 2600 leak events today that could have been prevented with as-path filters of some sort, either on a cutomer or peer. (this would obviously be in-addition to prefix-list filters). - Jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.