Lawnun wrote:
> Why does shrinking the number of addresses create 'priority' as far as
> the BGP is concerned? Is there some merit to fewer addresses, as opposed
> to more?
Something about specific routes being preferred. That's stuff you learn in
cisco router classes. Oh, it didn't work - not for all the cases.
What did work was when PCCW pulled the plug on Pakistan Telecom's entire AS.
And then kept the plug pulled till the Pakistanis fixed whatever was causing
them to leak youtube prefixes. Silly of pccw - they could easily have
filtered out the bogus prefixes that were being announced by the Pakistanis,
instead of their whole AS number.
> On a side note -- I'm totally curious if there's any legal implication
> for parties that are, as you all have indicated, lax in their enforcement
> of net standards? I mean, for one site, I can see it being as big of a
deal,
Umm.. nothing legal as in international prosecutions take huge amounts of
time and effort. All for some engineer who could use some (re)training?
Maybe not.
They learnt a hard, sharp lesson though, the Pakistanis .. if you screw up
on the internet you risk having your connectivity disrupted by heavier than
necessary mitigation measures.
srs
