North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Effective ways to deal with DDoS attacks?

  • From: Steven W. Raymond
  • Date: Mon May 06 19:01:45 2002

Stephen Griffin wrote:
> > > Tell them they will need to register their routes in the IRR, even if they
> > > don't necessarily advertise all or any of them. Build your exceptions
> > > based upon the irr, as for all bgp-speaking customers.
> >
> 
> not route-filtering. You use the irr-data to populate the exceptions
> to strict-mode rpf. The irr is more of a flight-plan of possibility.
> If the customer registers both sets of routes, and you use that
> data to build the acl, then it doesn't matter what the customer announces
> to you. Anything which fails the actual rpf check, will then be
> passed through the acl to selectively override the rpf check.

What about existing customers that don't yet use the IRR?  Say you
filter some BGP customers' route announcements using manually-built
prefix-lists.  Have found that by using distribute-list in (instead of
prefix-list), one can simply refer the distribute-list # in the strict
uRPF configuration and accomplish both functions (route filtering +
uRPF) easily with one ACL.
e.g.:
 ip verify unicast source reachable-via rx 49
 access-list 49 permit x.x.x.x 0.0.0.255
 access-list 49 permit y.y.y.y 0.0.0.252
 access-list 49 deny   any log

Prefix-lists are preferable over ACL-based distribute-lists.  Hey Cisco,
please make uRPF configuration accept either distribute-lists or
prefix-lists for the exception branching.  I realize that to IOS ACLs
and prefix-lists are not the same, but the benefits of prefix-lists vs.
distribute-lists are many.

It sounds that a lot of networks rely on IRRs for building BGP customer
route filters.  What method then is used for the cases where a customer
is not already using the IRR?  Forced IRR registration before BGP
turnup?  Or do you fallback on filtering by using prefix- or
distribute-lists?

What's NANOG's opinion: assuming that uRPF is implemented on all
customer interfaces, are there any legitimate purposes for a customer to
forward packets with source IP addresses not currently routed by the
transit provider towards the customer (either static or BGP)?