nanog mailing list archives
Re: Strange static route
From: Jérôme Nicolle <jerome () ceriz fr>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 19:42:09 +0200
Joel, Glen, Le 24/09/2011 03:18, Joel Maslak a écrit :
Protection against learning a bad default route through whatever routing protocol they are learning, since these two routes would be more specific than any typical default route. They probably got burned learning a default route.
Having a default route, or rather having a route to every possible adresses, is required when you expunge your routing tables of some prefixes yet you still wish to contact them relying on the next-hop's table. Simple application is to filter incoming routes longer than /20 or /21 to free up some memory on your routers (reducing the global table from 377k to less than 100k routes is a nice perspective ;) ) But a default route is an obvious move and could easily be leeked by an upstream, yet replacing yours if not properly filtered. So, using more precise routes (/1s to /8s) helps avoiding these risks and yet lets you roughly balance load to several gateways. -- Jérôme Nicolle
Current thread:
- Strange static route Glen Kent (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route Joel Maslak (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route jim deleskie (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route Christopher Morrow (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route Jimmy Hess (Sep 24)
- Re: Strange static route Jérôme Nicolle (Sep 25)
- Re: Strange static route jim deleskie (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route Jon Lewis (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route Stefan Fouant (Sep 23)
- Re: Strange static route Tom Storey (Sep 25)
- Re: Strange static route Joel Maslak (Sep 25)
- Re: Strange static route Joel Maslak (Sep 23)