On 11/15/16 12:48 PM, Job Snijders wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 03:12:40AM +0000, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote: >> My response marked with [Sriram] below. >> >> [Gert] Having implementations that could tack arbitrary "RPF lists" to >> an interface would be very nice, but this is more like "auto-generate >> ACLs based on prefix info" than "RPF" which stands for "reverse path >> filter" (not sure about the "filter" bit, though) >> >> [Sriram] Current Feasible Path uRPF makes use of announced prefixes to >> creates RPF tables of permitted source addresses on specific >> interfaces, and our enhanced FP uRPF also does the same, but with some >> more intelligence built in.
generating prefix lists for peers is something done out of band... e.g. by bgpq3 the information does not exist in the routing system to do that e.g. for prefiexes which are not presently announced or not announced to you, in particular before sessions are established. > Does this technique make routers self-aware? What exactly is meant with > the word 'intelligence' in this context? > > Kind regards, > > Job > > _______________________________________________ > GROW mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
