OK, here is the expanded, bloggy one. Some time Monday the more professionally written entry on The Cutting Edge News will be out and I'll share that one, too. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/22/23440/2313/339/700368 On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Chaim Rieger <chaim.rieger@gmail.com>wrote:
Back on list
I doubt you will get skewered, I promise to read it
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
------------------------------ *From*: neal rauhauser *Date*: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 01:24:08 -0600 *To*: <chaim.rieger@gmail.com>
*Subject*: Re: Great outage of 1997 - Does anyone recall?
Oh, you guys will skewer me for it :-) Shall I post the text here so it gets vetted first?
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 1:21 AM, <chaim.rieger@gmail.com> wrote:
Do post a link when its up.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message----- From: neal rauhauser <nrauhauser@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 01:11:16 To: Patrick W. Gilmore<patrick@ianai.net> Cc: NANOG list<nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Great outage of 1997 - Does anyone recall?
Well, I hope I'm not butchering the story up too badly - got an 800 word piece going up Monday on The Cutting Edge News and I'm doing something more lengthly and bloggy tonight for DailyKos, whilst hanging around abusing one of our spare 7507s with various new IOS versions.
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net
wrote:
On Feb 22, 2009, at 1:47 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
Does anyone have the full story on this?
<http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/1997-04/msg00444.html>
bottom line: o do not redistribute bgp into igp o do not redistribute dynamic igp into bgp o filter your peers and customers
And don't put all your most important infrastructure stuff (e.g. name server, mail server, shell host, etc.) in the first /24 of your /<shorter> allocation.
The biggest problem with 7007 was not that it announced a bunch of prefixes. It is that 7007 announced_classful_ prefix (it had been filtered through RIP, remember?) with AS_PATH of ^7007$. This means if you had a 194.1.0.0/16, you saw 194.1.0.0/24 from 7007, which is more specific. Why this is bad is left as an exercise to the reader.
And, of course, the problem persisted after the router in question was actually unplugged - not powered up or attached to any fibers/cables. Thank you Sprint for running beta code. :)
-- TTFN, patrick
-- mailto:Neal@layer3arts.com // GoogleTalk: nrauhauser@gmail.com IM: nealrauhauser
-- mailto:Neal@layer3arts.com // GoogleTalk: nrauhauser@gmail.com IM: nealrauhauser
-- mailto:Neal@layer3arts.com // GoogleTalk: nrauhauser@gmail.com IM: nealrauhauser