On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:34:21PM -0500, Christopher Morrow wrote:
why is it a good idea to send this to your customers? the next-hop info is surely only useful to your local network? done right it's even only relevant to the IX connected router, right? it seems wholely unusful to your customers. (to me at least)
If by "done right" you mean perhaps a feature like returning ICMP's from a loopback IP rather than the interface IP, there are two issues with
sorry, I was only talking|thinking about routing bits, I missed your point about people being able to ping an IX interface... I'd submit that in many networks the path to the nexthop may be a vastly different one than the path to 'the broken thing' through the isp/ixp/isp set of routers. I meant: "Is the nexthop in your (the ixp connected isp) network the IXP interface IP, or the loopback of your IXP connected router?" 'Done right' (I agree that this is an individual perspective) here meant, to me, that the IXP prefix wasn't necessary in the IXP connected ISP's network, reset to loopback in ibgp policy and never send the IXP prefix (connected route) off the IXP connected router. leaking the IX prefix to customers, to me, seems like a recipe for much wider/unintended leakage :(