On 2009-01-29, Claudio Jeker <cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 04:52:55PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: >> On 2009-01-29, Toni Mueller <openbsd-m...@oeko.net> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Sat, 10.01.2009 at 12:11:03 -0600, tico <t...@raapid.net> wrote: >> >> http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.sbin/bgpd/rde.c >> > >> > looking at CVS, it seems that multiple patches are needed, right? >> > >> > And we get the joy of threading them together ourselves, understanding >> > OpenBGPd's code in the process... maybe. >> >> This should work, but I run -current everywhere, I have no 4.4 boxes >> to test it on. >> >> Incidentally this looks like the same approach suggested by the >> draft RFC4893bis >> > > I just glanced over it and I'm very unhappy with the direction they're > taking. It is not what we do and IMO trying to fiddle out bad path > attributes and still use the crippled rest smells like routing loops > comming soon to a network near you. > Bad prefixes should not get redistributed this will also ensure that only > the originator of the problem is affected. >
Oh yeuch, I misinterpreted it. More discussion at http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.idr/5354
