That was one of our biggest worries.... people make mistakes and route leaks happen..... The unfortunate part we're faced with now is that we have several downstream customers who are multihomed. Because we're filtering out some of the prefixes that are not in an IRR, those routes are not nearly as attractive downstream giving the other carrier involved an advantage..... I can see this is where convenience/economics start to kick in ;( Appreciate all the replies on-list and off-list - it seems there is about 80/20 split on people doing prefix-list vs IRR filtering.... Paul -----Original Message----- From: Martin Barry [mailto:marty@supine.com] Sent: February 2, 2009 10:22 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Peer Filtering $quoted_author = "John van Oppen" ;
Here in the US we don't bother, max-prefix covers it... It seems
that
US originated prefixes are rather sporadically entered into the routing DBs.
...and you are not worried about someone leaking a subset of routes? I understand that most failure cases would trigger a max-prefix but a typo could allow just enough leakage to not hit max-prefix and yet still make something "important" unreachable. cheers marty -- with usenet gone, we just don't teach our kids entertainment-level hyperbole any more. --Paul Vixie http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2006-01/msg00593.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and contains confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and then destroy this transmission, including all attachments, without copying, distributing or disclosing same. Thank you."