As people might be aware, adding routes to null0 isn't the most effective way sometimes of dropping flood traffic. Sending it to an IP address, and then staticly associating a bogus mac address to that IP is often better - the router simply forwards the packet out onto the lan, and the ethernet swallows it. This puts less load on the router.
This is because Cisco Routers process switch packets to null0, because it is a CPU interface and not a physical interface. I would suggest that we should all place feature requests with our local Cisco vendor (Logical/Datacraft/Cisco Themselves/whatever). If we all place some pressure on Cisco then we might actually see something done about it. I have seen comments about this on NANOG, so I am sure that the feature request has been placed, but it's probable that Cisco are working with their usual latency to industry requests (ie a committee to form a working group to plan the implementaion of the project brief to be delivered to a team of IOS developers for peer-review, which will then prepare a report to return to the working group, which will then liase with Marketting and do a cost-benefit analysis before eventually deciding to implement it - geez, does this sound like ISOCNZ to anyone else?). David's idea about BGP seems like a good one, however, and one that we should be looking into. Also, anyone with the inclination to set up MBGP peering over APE or WIX please contact me at: james.tyson(a)attica.co.nz Cheers. James Tyson --- Samizdat New Media Solutions --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog