On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:51 AM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: >> some friends and i were talking about recent routing cfs, and found we >> needed a clearer taxonomy. i throw this out. >> >> leak - i receive P and send it on to folk to whom i should not send >> it for business reasons (transit, peer, ...) >> >> mis-origination - i originate P when i do not own it >> >> hijack - an intentional mis-origination >> >> 7007 - i receive P (or some sub/superset), process it in some way >> (likely through my igp), and re-originate it, or part of it, >> as my own >> >> we need a name for 7007 other then vinnie > > mis-origination. When you non-maliciously announce P as if you own it > (even though you do not) the exact details of how you screwed the > pooch are not externally important. And we have enough obscure names > for things as it is.
For that matter, just call it a hijack like it is. Don't legitimize originating a prefix you don't own by giving it an innocuous name. -Bill -- William Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
