Joe Abley wrote:
On 2005-06-03, at 10:26, Andre Oppermann wrote:
christian.macnevin@uk.bnpparibas.com wrote:
I guess it's been a while since I've played with it, but isn't this pretty well what happens with uRPF anyhow?
No, my proposal works as long as the customer advertizes their prefixes via BGP, not matter how long the path or what community attributes are set (for example NOEXPORT). No matter how they send it, as long as they send it, it works fine.
So, your proposal is loose-mode uRPF?
I thought that loose-mode uRPF is what was recommended for any connected entity that is multi-homed. And that makes sense. What happened to that? Whats next? uRPF in core? At which point do we stop breaking things? There must be a safe way to solve the problem of spoofing routed space without breaking multi-homing.