nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP Attribute 128
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:28:51 +0300
On (2013-09-25 11:35 -0400), Jared Mauch wrote: Hi,
I'm not really in favor of the features vendors have provided, such as this to just drop the attribute or routes.
I would encourage customers to require in their transit agreements that bgp updates are not mangled by provider. It would help internally if you have customer backing. I think it's overraction to kill useful features because sometime on some platform there has been NLRI parsing bug which caused issues. Once those filters are deployed there will be strong resistance to remove them. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- BGP Attribute 128 Jared Mauch (Sep 25)
- Re: BGP Attribute 128 Saku Ytti (Sep 26)
- Re: BGP Attribute 128 Jared Mauch (Sep 26)
- Re: BGP Attribute 128 Saku Ytti (Sep 26)
- Re: BGP Attribute 128 Jared Mauch (Sep 26)
- Re: BGP Attribute 128 Saku Ytti (Sep 26)