|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Provider/NAP filtering policies
My apologies, allow me to make a clarification. When I mentioned NAPs, I was referring more to provider peering policies _AT_ a NAP, rather than a NAP's peering policies which of course as you pointed out would be moot. Being relegated to closed enterprise environments for the past few years, I'm trying to play catch-up and validate my previous assumption that most providers filter at a /19 boundary, etc. Regards, Jade -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woodcock [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 12:42 PM To: Deane, Jade Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Provider/NAP filtering policies On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 [email protected] wrote: > I was hoping someone could point me in the direction of provider/NAP > prefix filtering policies. Most important to me is UU and Cogent, but a > concise listing of notables would be much appreciated. Just to clarify, NAPs or Internet exchanges are typically (like more than 99% of the time) layer-2 services, which don't pay attention to or care about layer-3 things like IP prefixes. A few have policies regarding what participants should filter on their own behalf, but of the four hundered odd exchanges currently operating out there, I don't know of any which filter prefixes themselves. Virtually all _providers_ over a certain size filter heavily, of course, and that's probably the portion of your question you'll get more (and more useful) answers to. -Bill
|