I'm still baffled - why do you want to reject routes containing private ASNs? It's strange and odd, but not invalid or illegal. AFAICT, it's analogous to routing public IP traffic across a link that uses RFC1918 addresses - completely irrelevant to the end-user.
Am I missing something? -Adam On August 21, 2014 2:04:33 AM CDT, Laurent CARON <[email protected]> wrote: >On 21/08/2014 00:01, Stuart Henderson wrote: >> That would deny (reject) routes, it would not strip private ASN from >the >> AS-path, openbgp doesn't have a way to do that. > >Hi Stuart, > >That's exactly what I meant to do. The subject I chose is actually >wrong >& misleading. > >> If you actually mean rejecting the routes (not modifying the path on >> routes which you want to permit), and if it's customers (or possibly >> peers) that you're talking about, explicitly permit what you expect >to >> see, deny all others. it's the only sane way. (Obviously make use of >IRR >> or other automated means to setup filters, if appropriate). > >I mean rejecting routes from transits carrying private AS# in the >AS_PATH. > >Thanks > >Laurent -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
