On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:27:02AM -0800, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:08 AM Grant Taylor via NANOG
> wrote:
> > I wonder if Feasible Path uRPF or Enhanced Feasible Path uRPF might help
> > the situation. However I suspect they both suffer from the FIB != RIB
> > problem
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:08 AM Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
> I wonder if Feasible Path uRPF or Enhanced Feasible Path uRPF might help
> the situation. However I suspect they both suffer from the FIB != RIB
> problem and associated signaling.
Hi Grant,
That's a fairly good way to think
On 11/8/22 10:53 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Hi Grant,
Hi Bill, and everyone else who replied.
Two problems here:
Thank you for taking the time to reply and help me understand the
shortcomings of uRPF better.
I wonder if Feasible Path uRPF or Enhanced Feasible Path uRPF might help
the
*NANOG 87: Call for Presentations *
*NANOG PC is Now Accepting Proposals for NANOG 87*
*NANOG 87 will take place in Atlanta, GA, on 13 -15 Feb 2023.* The PC is
looking to schedule over 1,800 minutes of content for NANOG 87 and has
confirmed 165 minutes already - so don't wait!
*Requested Topics:*
*NANOG 87: Call for Presentations *
*NANOG PC is Now Accepting Proposals for NANOG 87*
*NANOG 87 will take place in Atlanta, GA, on 13 -15 Feb 2023.* The PC is
looking to schedule over 1,800 minutes of content for NANOG 87 and has
confirmed 165 minutes already - so don't wait!
*Requested Topics:*
Hello Job,
Thank you very much for your reply! I got that no AS can actually filter all
the invalids. Yet I was trying to figure out why we couldn't see reasonable
amount of withdrawals from AS6939 about invalid prefixes, as they explained how
they implement ROV
6 matches
Mail list logo
