> Good use-case for
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-adj-rib-out and
> snapshot auditing before and after changes. Leak didn't last long but
> it could have been caught within milliseconds verses minutes via oh
> sh** alarms.
[ i happen to like bmp, but ... ]
if the sender d
>> Damn you Google.. yup. Thanks for links.
> A public post-mortem would be highly appreciated (from all parties).
there has been more press hysteria on this than actual packet droppage.
goog fat fingered or otherwise misannounced a numer of large consumer
isp's prefixes. the leak was for aybe
Tegna, ownership group of KHOU, had a news report
that the news studio for KHOU was setup at a "PBS station
in Dallas", with satellite uplink to KUSA (Denver).
Master Control is running at KUSA Denver for KHOU
service area, with satellite back to the transmitter
for KHOU.
According to the FCC fil
I agree a max-prefix outbound could potentially be useful and would
hopefully not be too terribly difficult to implement for most vendors.
Perhaps RFC4486 would need to be updated to reflect this as a
possibility as well?
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Julien Goodwin wrote:
> On 28/08/17 18:
> Well, if you are using public IP addresses for infra you are violating your
> RIR’s policy more than likely.
[Citation needed.] :)
Rob
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017, Marcus Josephson wrote:
Damn you Google.. yup. Thanks for links.
A public post-mortem would be highly appreciated (from all parties).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 08:41:12AM -0400, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> > On 29 August 2017 at 03:38, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> >
> >> Well not completely useless. BCP will still drop BOGONs at the edge
> >> before they leak into your network.
> >
> > Assuming you don't use them in your own infra. And c
> On 29 August 2017 at 03:38, Robert Blayzor wrote:
>
>> Well not completely useless. BCP will still drop BOGONs at the edge before
>> they leak into your network.
>
> Assuming you don't use them in your own infra. And cost of RPF is lot
> higher than cost of ACL. Them being entirely static ent
On 29 August 2017 at 03:38, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> Well not completely useless. BCP will still drop BOGONs at the edge before
> they leak into your network.
Assuming you don't use them in your own infra. And cost of RPF is lot
higher than cost of ACL. Them being entirely static entities they
s
9 matches
Mail list logo
