- Previous message: Bill Nash: "Re: http://cisco.com 403 Forbidden"
- Maybe in reply to: James Blessing: "Quick BGP peering question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Jack Bates (no email)
Date: Wed Jan 03 2007 - 12:31:35 EST
James Blessing wrote:
> Very simply : Would you accept traffic from a customer who insists on sending 0
> prefixes across a BGP session?
>
I just ran through a related issue with one of my upstream peers. It appears
that they have a RPF strictly enforced policy, yet during the process of
renumbering a customer of a customer from another ISPs space, they were wanting
to throw all traffic (our IPs and the other provider's) out to us.
It comes down to a simple question of policy, and if you are going to mandate
how your customers route proper, valid traffic. I about pulled the plug in my
situation, but finally got it sorted out. Thank goodness some routers can allow
exceptions to RPF and other providers just use ACLs instead.
0 prefixes is no different than partial prefixes. Asymmetric routing should not
be a crime on the Internet because "I don't like it" or "but basic RPF is easier
and you're doing something funky anyways".
Jack Bates
|
|
|