Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 12:02:36PM -0400, Christopher Morrow: > > (2) IIUC, this proposal envisages BGP speakers commonly > > telling others to blackhole specific /32's or /128's. And > > of course as the draft says BGP doesn't provide us with a > > way to "prevent the unauthorized modification of > > information by the forwarding agent." Given those two > > > > err, there is MD5 auth for tcp... which SHOULD prevent modification > in-flight. > of course (ha!) there's notionally tcp-AO which should do the same thing, > perhaps in the 'year 2000' (say with proper gravitas) when we... wait, > darn! no implementations of AO exist.
I do not believe that is the intended meaning; I think it is reference to a device's route policy, intentional or accidental. _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
