North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: peering requirements (Re: DDOS anecdotes)
- From: Roland Dobbins
- Date: Sun Jun 24 01:32:15 2001
Which is where the IRR is supposed to come in.
Simon Lyall wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2001, Eric Oosting wrote:
> > Under what circumstances would the assumption (that an AS should always
> > advertise a route to the source address of packets it transmits) not be a
> > good one?
> Assymmetrical routing is a good one (see the reference Roland Dobbins
> posted for part of the story).
> Half the networks here are advertised out of different places from which
> the packets leave. This is mainly due to having one way satellite links.
> Sure the networks are advertised somewhere, but it's on the other side of
> the world (and to a bunch of different providers) from where we send the
> packets to you.
> Another one we have is a pop with a small link and larger link. To make
> some use out of the small link you might advertise only some networks at
> the pop. But at the same time outgoing traffic from any of the networks at
> that pop may go out that link. Sure you could prepend everything half a
> dozen times but some people ignore prepends for directly connected peers
> so this won't work (we tried it, we know).
> Another point, if people are going to have filters then they MUST have a
> quick and easy way for this filters to be changed and to propogate
> everywhere quickly. People who insist that you provide an exact list of
> what you want to advertise (with the exact prefixes) and then take a week
> to process any changes (or 12 hours for that matter) should have prices to
> match their discount level of service.
> Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: email@example.com
> Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: firstname.lastname@example.org
> ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz
Roland Dobbins <email@example.com> // 408.859.4137 voice