Folks, Is there a TTL value enforcment on EBGP session establishment? For some reason I thought that both peers have to have the SAMe value? Is that true? For example: default EBGP = TTL = 1 (if one end sends something other than 1 in its OPEN message, we won't bring up the adjecancy) multihop EBGP = TTL = 255 (by default) - likewise, if one end sends something else, adjecancy won't come up multihop EBGP = TTL = modified hop value - ex. 15 (both ends have to have it) I understand that ttl-security and its implications. Thanks, Vitto
On May 11, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Vitto Capabianco wrote:
Is there a TTL value enforcment on EBGP session establishment
No. -- TTFN, patrick
For some reason I thought that both peers have to have the SAMe value? Is that true? For example:
default EBGP = TTL = 1 (if one end sends something other than 1 in its OPEN message, we won't bring up the adjecancy) multihop EBGP = TTL = 255 (by default) - likewise, if one end sends something else, adjecancy won't come up multihop EBGP = TTL = modified hop value - ex. 15 (both ends have to have it)
I understand that ttl-security and its implications.
Thanks,
Vitto
On May 12, 2010, at 1:10 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
No.
Concur, but the original poster should also look at the GTSM, which doesn't do what he asked about but which does make use of TTL as a validation mechanism: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3682.txt> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice. -- H.L. Mencken
participants (3)
-
Dobbins, Roland -
Patrick W. Gilmore -
Vitto Capabianco