|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: an effect of ignoring BCP38
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:59:39 +0300 (EEST) > From: Pekka Savola <[email protected]> > > On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Jo Rhett wrote: > > On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:10 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >> By the time you walk our list of upstreams to any of the '5 biggest > >> anything', you've gotten to places where our multihomed status > >> means you can't filter our source address very easily (or more > >> properly, where you can't filter multihomed sources in general). > > > > 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. > > If you can manage ACLs for these customers, that's fine. But maybe > your multihomed customers and '5 biggest anything' customers are > different. Maybe your multihomed customer has 5 prefixes. The big > ones could have 5000. That's a pretty big ACL to manage. It's big, but not un-workable. Just looking at our lists, the longest is over 212K entries and we have 5 over 5K and 20 over 1K. We would have even bigger ones if the IRR had more complete information. I'll admit that doing this for a tier-1 would probably not work, though I have never been able to try as the requisite information is not publicly available. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751 Attachment:
pgp00018.pgp
|