North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: an effect of ignoring BCP38
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:25:01 PDT, Jo Rhett said: > I don't agree with this statement. I hear this a lot, and it's not > really true. Being multihomed doesn't mean that your source addresses > are likely to be random. (or would be valid if they were) > > A significant portion of our customers, and *all* of the biggest > paying ones, are multihomed. And they might have a lot of different > ranges, but we know what the ranges are and filter on those. The problem isn't your customers, it's *their* customers who also multihome to somebody you peer with at 3 other locations. AS1312 talks to AS7066, which talks to AS1239, and we talk to AS40220, which talks to Level3 and AboveNet. Now - for each of your routers, what interfaces *can* or *can't* see legitimate packets from us? Does your answer change if something at MATP burps and loses its Lambdarail connection? *That* is the use case that makes it difficult-to-impossible for the 'top 5' to do anything resembling strict BCP38. Attachment:
pgp00017.pgp
|